P U B L I C S E R V I C E S P U B L I C S E R V I C E S U S Department of Justice U S Department of Justice Support for the Department in Conducting an Analysis of Diversity in the Attorney Workforce Support for the Department in Conducting an Analysis of Diversity in the Attorney Workforce Final Report Final Report June 14 2002 June 14 2002 All excisions are made pursuant to Exemption 5 of the FOIA All excisions are made pursuant to Exemption 5 of the FOIA ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE MAY 2002 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE PUBLIC SERVICES - II - UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE MAY 2002 PUBLIC SERVICES - II - Contents Contents Executive Summary ES-1 Executive Summary ES-1 1 Background and Overview of Study 1 2 Methodology 3 2 1 Analytical framework and Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity 3 2 2 Data collection techniques 7 2 2 1 Analysis of human resources practices 7 2 2 2 Analysis of workforce data 8 2 2 3 Focus groups and individual interviews 8 2 2 4 Interviews with senior leadership 12 2 2 5 Employee survey 12 2 2 6 Summary of data collection techniques 12 2 3 Inventory of data collected 13 2 4 Summary of data collection and analytical approach 15 3 Findings 18 3 1 Background on organization 18 3 2 Work climate 24 3 2 1 Workforce identity profiles 25 3 2 2 Culture and acculturation 28 3 2 3 Structural integration 34 3 2 4 Inter-group conflict 43 3 2 5 Informal integration 45 3 2 6 Stereotyping 47 3 2 7 Human resources systems 48 3 2 8 Summary of work climate findings 65 3 3 Individual and organizational outcomes 66 3 3 1 Job satisfaction 66 3 3 2 Organizational identification 67 3 3 3 Job involvement 68 3 3 4 Recruiting 69 3 3 5 Hiring 70 3 3 6 Performance appraisal 75 3 3 7 Promotion 76 3 3 8 Compensation 88 3 3 9 Award and bonus allocation 90 3 3 10 Retention 93 3 3 11 Conclusion to individual and organizational outcomes findings 97 3 4 Benchmarking and best practices results 98 3 4 1 Benchmarking 98 3 4 2 Best practices 104 3 4 3 Conclusion to benchmarking and best practices findings 120 1 Background and Overview of Study 1 2 Methodology 3 2 1 Analytical framework and Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity 3 2 2 Data collection techniques 7 2 2 1 Analysis of human resources practices 7 2 2 2 Analysis of workforce data 8 2 2 3 Focus groups and individual interviews 8 2 2 4 Interviews with senior leadership 12 2 2 5 Employee survey 12 2 2 6 Summary of data collection techniques 12 2 3 Inventory of data collected 13 2 4 Summary of data collection and analytical approach 15 3 Findings 18 3 1 Background on organization 18 3 2 Work climate 24 3 2 1 Workforce identity profiles 25 3 2 2 Culture and acculturation 28 3 2 3 Structural integration 34 3 2 4 Inter-group conflict 43 3 2 5 Informal integration 45 3 2 6 Stereotyping 47 3 2 7 Human resources systems 48 3 2 8 Summary of work climate findings 65 3 3 Individual and organizational outcomes 66 3 3 1 Job satisfaction 66 3 3 2 Organizational identification 67 3 3 3 Job involvement 68 3 3 4 Recruiting 69 3 3 5 Hiring 70 3 3 6 Performance appraisal 75 3 3 7 Promotion 76 3 3 8 Compensation 88 3 3 9 Award and bonus allocation 90 3 3 10 Retention 93 3 3 11 Conclusion to individual and organizational outcomes findings 97 3 4 Benchmarking and best practices results 98 3 4 1 Benchmarking 98 3 4 2 Best practices 104 3 4 3 Conclusion to benchmarking and best practices findings 120 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE MAY 2002 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE PUBLIC SERVICES - III - UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE MAY 2002 PUBLIC SERVICES - III - 4 Recommendations 121 4 1 Leadership 121 4 1 1 Demonstrate AG DAG-level commitment to and communication of diversity issues and solutions 121 4 1 2 Identify levers to implement change 121 4 2 Research and Measurement 122 4 2 1 Create a measurement plan for diversity 122 4 2 2 Create a performance measurement system to increase management awareness of and accountability for diversity 123 4 2 3 Conduct a study of case assignment processes to increase likelihood of fairness 124 4 2 4 Administer exit surveys 124 4 2 5 Administer attitudinal surveys on an ongoing basis 124 4 3 HR Systems 125 4 3 1 Implement a comprehensive career development process 125 4 3 2 Implement a performance management process with more than two levels 125 4 3 3 Develop and promulgate consistent processes for human resources systems 125 4 3 4 Leverage lessons learned from the Honors Program for lateral recruitment and implement more creative sourcing techniques 126 4 3 5 Disseminate vacancy information across components 127 4 3 6 Further develop mentoring capabilities 128 4 3 7 Appoint diversity advocates in each component 128 4 4 Education 128 4 4 1 Training for leaders to mitigate climate issues 128 4 4 2 Training on the organizational change model 128 4 5 Follow-up and Accountability 128 4 5 1 Base awards on adherence to the measurement plan 128 4 5 2 Give visibility to diversity-related metrics 129 4 Recommendations 121 4 1 Leadership 121 p 4 1 1 Demonstrate AG DAG-level commitment to and communication of diversityy issues and solutions 121 4 1 2 Identify y levers to implement p g 121 change 4 2 Research and Measurement 122 y 122 4 2 1 Create a measurement pplan for diversity y to increase management g awareness of and 4 2 2 Create a pperformance measurement system y for diversityy 123 accountability g pprocesses to increase likelihood of fairness 124 4 2 3 Conduct a studyy of case assignment y 124 4 2 4 Administer exit surveys y on an ongoing g g basis 124 4 2 5 Administer attitudinal surveys y 4 3 HR Systems 125 p a comprehensive p career development p pprocess 125 4 3 1 Implement p a pperformance management g pprocess with more than two levels 125 4 3 2 Implement g consistent pprocesses for human resources systems y 125 4 3 3 Developp and ppromulgate g lessons learned from the Honors Program g for lateral recruitment and 4 3 4 Leverage p q 126 implement more creative sourcingg techniques y information across components p 127 4 3 5 Disseminate vacancy g capabilities p 128 4 3 6 Further developp mentoring pp y advocates in each component p 128 4 3 7 Appoint diversity 4 4 Education 128 g climate issues 128 4 4 1 Trainingg for leaders to mitigate 128 g on the organizational g g model odel 4 4 2 Training change F p and Accountabilityy 128 4 5 Follow-up 4 5 1 Base awards on adherence to the measurement pplan 1288 4 5 2 Give visibility to diversity-related metrics 129 Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Interview Focus Group and Employee Survey Questions A-1 Additional Graphs B-1 Bibliography C-1 Additional Statistical Analysis of Survey Results D-1 Interview Focus Group and Employee Survey Questions A-1 Additional Graphs B-1 Bibliography C-1 Additional Statistical Analysis of Survey Results D-1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE ES-1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE ES-1 Executive Summary Executive Summary The U S Department of Justice has recognized the importance of having a diverse attorney workforce—both to ensure that it performs at its best and to ensure that it maintains the confidence of the American people As the “nation’s law firm ” DOJ must represent the nation The U S Department of Justice has recognized the importance of having a diverse attorney workforce—both to ensure that it performs at its best and to ensure that it maintains the confidence of the American people As the “nation’s law firm ” DOJ must represent the nation DOJ commissioned KPMG Consulting and Taylor Cox Associates to analyze its human resources management practices for their effect on the Department’s ability to recruit hire promote retain and utilize an attorney workforce that is diverse with respect to gender race and ethnicity Our analytical framework the Interactional Model for Cultural Diversity focuses on how the work climate at DOJ impacts individual and organizational outcomes DOJ commissioned KPMG Consulting and Taylor Cox Associates to analyze its human resources management practices for their effect on the Department’s ability to recruit hire promote retain and utilize an attorney workforce that is diverse with respect to gender race and ethnicity Our analytical framework the Interactional Model for Cultural Diversity focuses on how the work climate at DOJ impacts individual and organizational outcomes In order to achieve its diversity goals the Department must attain the following In order to achieve its diversity goals the Department must attain the following § § Female and racial ethnic minorities are represented at all levels of the Department at a rate consistent with their representation in the overall population of attorneys in the United States All gender and racial ethnic groups of attorneys achieve parity in job satisfaction and perceptions of fairness in the work climate § § Female and racial ethnic minorities are represented at all levels of the Department at a rate consistent with their representation in the overall population of attorneys in the United States All gender and racial ethnic groups of attorneys achieve parity in job satisfaction and perceptions of fairness in the work climate The study involved assessing the Department’s human resources administration by interviewing HR managers analyzing workforce data conducting interviews and focus groups with attorneys and administering an employee survey to the attorney workforce In all approximately 1 400 DOJ attorneys out of an approximate total of 9 200 provided input into the study In addition we gathered input for the study from the American Bar Association minority bar associations and DOJ attorney employee associations We also explored public- and private-sector organizations for benchmarks and best practices The study involved assessing the Department’s human resources administration by interviewing HR managers analyzing workforce data conducting interviews and focus groups with attorneys and administering an employee survey to the attorney workforce In all approximately 1 400 DOJ attorneys out of an approximate total of 9 200 provided input into the study In addition we gathered input for the study from the American Bar Association minority bar associations and DOJ attorney employee associations We also explored public- and private-sector organizations for benchmarks and best practices Following are the key findings of the study Following are the key findings of the study Attorneys across demographic groups believe that the Department is a good place to work Most attorneys across race ethnicity gender and component groups report that the environment is collegial and productive They cite their autonomy and the challenging rewarding work that they perform Most cite satisfaction with their jobs an expectation to stay and a high degree of positive identification with DOJ Moreover private industry cites DOJ as a trend-setter for diversity Attorneys y across demographic g p groups g p believe that the Department p t is a ggood p place to work work Most attorneys y across race ethnicity y ggender and component p ggroups p report p that the environment is collegial g and p productive Theyy cite their autonomy y and the challenging g g rewarding g work that theyy perform p p to stay y and a high g degree g of Most cite satisfaction with their jjobs an expectation ppositive identification with DOJ Moreover private industry cites DOJ as a trend-setter for diversity However the Department does face significant diversity issues Whites and minorities as well as men and women perceive differences in many aspects of the work climate For example minorities are significantly more likely than whites to cite stereotyping harassment and racial tension as characteristics of the work climate Many of these differences are also present between men and women although to a lesser extent However the Department p g y issues Whites and minorities as well does face significant diversity as men and women pperceive differences in many y aspects p p of the work climate For example minorities are significantly g y more likely y than whites to cite stereotyping yp g harassment and racial tension as characteristics of the work climate Many y of these differences are also present between men and women although t to a lesser extent Minorities perceive unfairness in a number of human resources practices such as hiring and promotion Among the most common concerns cited were perceptions of unfairness in case assignment and a belief that exclusive informal networks limit access to communication with managers premium job assignments mentoring and promotion Minorities perceive p g and unfairness in a number of human resources ppractices such as hiring ppromotion Amongg the most common concerns cited were perceptions p p of unfairness in case assignment and a belief that exclusive informal networks limit ac access to communication with managers premium job assignments mentoring and promotion ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE ES-2 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE ES-2 The Department suffers from an inadequate human resources management infrastructure There is widespread perception especially among minorities that HR practices lack transparency This results in attorneys perceiving that practices are unfair The Department does not emphasize career development and tools for performance appraisal are deficient As a result attorneys cite poor “people management” by supervisors The Department human resources management infrastructure p suffers from an inadequate q g p perception p p especially p y among g minorities that HR ppractices lack There is widespread p y This results in attorneys y pperceiving g that practices p are unfair The Department p does transparency p p and tools for performance p p not emphasize career development appraisal are deficient As a result attorneys cite poor “people management” by supervisors Section Chiefs are an extremely critical element of the Department’s diversity climate They have significant authority in recruitment hiring promotion performance appraisal case assignment and career development The Section Chief workforce is not diverse and turnover is low This pattern combined with the generally low attention that these managers pay to staff career development leads minorities to perceive a lack of advancement opportunities p y climate They Section Chiefs are an extremelyy critical element of the Department’s diversity g g promotion p performance p pp case have significant authorityy in recruitment hiring appraisal g and career development p assignment The Section Chief workforce is not diverse and turnover is p combined with the generally g y low attention that these managers g ppay y to staff low This pattern career development leads minorities to perceive a lack of advancementt opportunities The Department’s attorney workforce is more diverse than the U S legal workforce 38% female compared to 30% in the U S legal labor pool and 15% minority compared to 12% in the labor pool The Department’s attorney workforce is about as diverse as the federal government legal workforce whose attorneys are 38% female and 16% minority The Department’s attorney workforce is more diverse than the U S legal workforce 38% female compared to 30% in the U S legal labor pool and 15% minority compared to 12% in the labor pool The Department’s attorney workforce is about as diverse as the federal government legal workforce whose attorneys are 38% female and 16% minority Hiring is serving to make the Department even more diverse hires in 2001 were 40% female and 21% minority In particular the Attorney General’s Honors Program is an important tool for increasing diversity Honors Program hires in 2001 were 63% female compared to 45% of the law school graduating class and 30% minority compared to 21% of the class of 2001 p Hiring is serving to make the Department even more diverse hires in 2001 were 40% female y In pparticular the Attorney General’s Honors Program is an important and 21% minority tool for increasing diversity Honors Program hires in 2001 were 63% female compared to 45% of the law school graduating class and 30% minority compared to 21% of the class of 2001 Minorities are significantly under-represented in management ranks They comprise only 7% of career SES attorneys and 11% of supervisory Assistant U S Attorneys Women constitute 31% of SESs and 37% of supervisory AUSAs Among GS-15 attorneys in the Litigating Divisions minorities comprise 11% of non-supervisors and 6% of supervisors and women comprise 37% of non-supervisors and 33% of supervisors Minorities are significantly under-represented in management ranks They comprise only 7% of career SES attorneys and 11% of supervisory Assistant U S Attorneys Women constitute 31% of SESs and 37% of supervisory AUSAs Among GS-15 attorneys in the Litigating Divisions minorities comprise 11% of non-supervisors and 6% of supervisors and women comprise 37% of non-supervisors and 33% of supervisors Minorities are substantially more likely to leave the Department than whites In 2001 the attrition rate was 49% higher among minorities than whites There was no difference in recent attrition between men and women Minorities are substantially more likely to leave the Department than whites In 2001 the attrition rate was 49% higher among minorities than whites There was no difference in recent attrition between men and women There are also statistically significant race and or gender effects on a number of HR outcomes including starting grade current grade promotions and compensation For example the average minority GS attorney is currently 0 4 steps lower than the average white and the average woman is 0 3 steps lower than the average man controlling for seniority grade and component g g effects on a number of HR outcomes There are also statisticallyy significant race and or gender including starting grade current grade promotions and compensation For example the average minority GS attorney is currently 0 4 steps lower than the average white and the average woman is 0 3 steps lower than the average man controlling for seniority grade and component Based on these findings we recommend that the Department take the following actions Based on these findings we recommend that the Department take the following actions Exercise AG- and DAG-level leadership to stress the importance of diversity and their commitment to it Publicly commit the Department to parity both in diversity outcomes e g comparable representation at all levels and in attitudes e g job satisfaction among all demographic groups Identify levers for change focusing on AAGs who are diverse and Section Chiefs Implement training of leaders to identify their role in shaping work climate issues and in effectuating change p to stress the importance p of diversity y and their Exercise AG- and DAG-level leadership p p y both in diversityy outcomes e g commitment to it Publiclyy commit the Department to parity p representation p at all levels and in attitudes e g g jjob satisfaction among g all comparable g p ggroups p Identify y levers for change g focusing g on AAGs who are diverse and demographic p Section Chiefs Implement training of leaders to identify their role in shaping work climate issues and in effectuating change ge ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE ES-3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE ES-3 Create a diversity measurement plan which addresses key elements of diversity by component Hold management accountable for adhering to the plan and base their rewards on success As components develop solutions implement them department-wide Create a diversity y measurement p plan which addresses key y elements of diversity y by y component p accountable for adhering Hold management g g to the plan p and base their rewards on success As components develop solutions implement them department-wide Implement a performance measurement system to track diversity results against measurement plans Routinize reporting of diversity outcomes by component and section What gets measured gets done—managers do not like to be at the bottom of lists in areas that senior leadership finds important to track diversity measurement Implement p a performance p measurement system y y results against g p p g of diversity y outcomes by y component p plans Routinize reporting and section What ggets measured ggets done—managers do not like to be att the bottom of lists in areas that senior leadership finds important Implement a career development process Hold managers accountable for career development of staff Emphasize skill in and attention to career development in selecting and nurturing managers Implement a staff performance management system with more than two performance levels and enforce its use in a value-adding way Further develop mentoring capabilities in a systematic program with ongoing analysis and improvement Good diversity management begins with good HR management p e e t a career ca ee development deve op e t process p ocess Hold o d managers a age s accou tab e for o ca ee deve op Implement accountable career development of staff Emphasize p skill in and attention to career development p in selecting g and nurturing managers g Implement p a staff performance p g y with more than two management system p levels and enforce its use in a value-addingg way y Further develop p mentoring g performance p y pprogram g with ongoing g g analysis and improvement Good diversity capabilities in a systematic management begins with good HR management Address the perceived lack of transparency and unfairness in HR systems Conduct a study of case assignments to determine whether they are fair Involve more diverse and more junior staff in recruiting and other HR functions Promulgate consistent standards and policies for employee performance and HR administration perceived lack of transparency p y and unfairness in HR systems y Address the p Conduct a study g y are fair Involve more diverse and more jjunior of case assignments to determine whether they g and other HR functions Promulgate consistent standards and policies for staff in recruiting employee performance and HR administration Administer exit surveys and attitudinal surveys on an ongoing basis to track diversity climate changes Statistically model the relationship between survey results and poor staff performance and attrition Devise proactive strategies to reduce the likelihood of these adverse outcomes y and attitudinal surveys y on an ongoing g g basis to track diversity y climate Administer exit surveys g Statistically y model the relationship p between survey y results and ppoor staff pperformance changes and attrition Devise proactive strategies to reduce the likelihood of these adverse outcomes Leverage some of the successes of the Honors Program for lateral hiring diversity Circulate vacancy announcements more widely including in DOJ components other than that in which the vacancy occurs Be more creative about defining qualifications including partnerships with industry to increase outreach to a diverse audience—especially for fields with historically low diversity Track data on applicants through the recruiting and selection process for more informed planning and sourcing of candidates g some of the successes of the Honors Program g for lateral hiringg diversity y Circulate Leverage y announcements more widely y including g in DOJ components p other than that in which the vacancy y occurs Be more creative about definingg qualifications q including g ppartnerships p with vacancy y to increase outreach to a diverse audience—especially p y for fields with historically y low industry y Track data on applicants pp g the recruiting and selection process for more diversity through informed planning and sourcing off candidates ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 1 1 Background and Overview of Study 1 Background and Overview of Study In January 2002 the U S Department of Justice DOJ or Department commissioned KPMG Consulting Inc and Taylor Cox Associates to study and analyze diversity in its attorney workforce focusing specifically on women and minority racial ethnic groups The Department understands the value of diversity in improving its mission delivery and the importance of workforce diversity in maintaining the confidence of the American people After all as the “nation’s law firm ” the Department should represent the nation For DOJ to be effective in enforcing the nation’s laws and assuring fairness for all Americans the citizenry must believe that the Department is itself fair in its hiring practices and its work environment In January 2002 the U S Department of Justice DOJ or Department commissioned KPMG Consulting Inc and Taylor Cox Associates to study and analyze diversity in its attorney workforce focusing specifically on women and minority racial ethnic groups The Department understands the value of diversity in improving its mission delivery and the importance of workforce diversity in maintaining the confidence of the American people After all as the “nation’s law firm ” the Department should represent the nation For DOJ to be effective in enforcing the nation’s laws and assuring fairness for all Americans the citizenry must believe that the Department is itself fair in its hiring practices and its work environment This study focuses on the effects of recruiting hiring promotion and retention practices on gender racial and ethnic diversity within DOJ’s attorney workforce It was conducted in the eleven departmental components as DOJ refers to its organizational units with a significant population of attorneys These components include the six Litigating Divisions—Antitrust ATR Civil CIV Civil Rights CRT Criminal CRM Environment and Natural Resources ENR and Tax TAX —the Immigration and Naturalization Service INS the Bureau of Prisons BOP or Federal Prisons the Executive Office for Immigration Review EOIR the United States Attorneys USA and the United States Trustees UST These components contain most of the practicing attorneys in DOJ 1 This study focuses on the effects of recruiting hiring promotion and retention practices on gender racial and ethnic diversity within DOJ’s attorney workforce It was conducted in the eleven departmental components as DOJ refers to its organizational units with a significant population of attorneys These components include the six Litigating Divisions—Antitrust ATR Civil CIV Civil Rights CRT Criminal CRM Environment and Natural Resources ENR and Tax TAX —the Immigration and Naturalization Service INS the Bureau of Prisons BOP or Federal Prisons the Executive Office for Immigration Review EOIR the United States Attorneys USA and the United States Trustees UST These components contain most of the practicing attorneys in DOJ 1 DOJ sought to achieve three primary objectives in the study to take a snapshot of where it stands with respect to diversity now and in recent history to diagnose and explain any diversity problems and to devise solutions and associated implementation strategies and performance measures Our analytical framework for performing this study is the Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity Interactional Model The model defines specific elements of the work climate which is defined as the environment and culture in which employees work and human resources practices that link to diversity outcomes We collected data through numerous individual interviews focus groups and surveys of attorneys at all levels and components analysis of the Department’s human resources management HRM process benchmarking of other government agencies and best practices of government agencies private law firms corporations and industry associations DOJ sought to achieve three primary objectives in the study to take a snapshot of where it stands with respect to diversity now and in recent history to diagnose and explain any diversity problems and to devise solutions and associated implementation strategies and performance measures Our analytical framework for performing this study is the Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity Interactional Model The model defines specific elements of the work climate which is defined as the environment and culture in which employees work and human resources practices that link to diversity outcomes We collected data through numerous individual interviews focus groups and surveys of attorneys at all levels and components analysis of the Department’s human resources management HRM process benchmarking of other government agencies and best practices of government agencies private law firms corporations and industry associations Organization of report Organization of report This final report contains the following sections This final report contains the following sections § § § Section 2 Methodology describes the Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity the analytical framework used for the study and details the processes used to collect and analyze data Section 3 Findings outlines findings for each element of the model and from the benchmarking best practices task Section 4 Recommendations outlines recommendations based upon the findings 1 Throughout this report we use the terms diversity and workforce standing alone When we do so they always refer to diversity with respect to gender race and ethnicity and the attorney workforce in the eleven studied components § § § Section 2 Methodology describes the Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity the analytical framework used for the study and details the processes used to collect and analyze data Section 3 Findings outlines findings for each element of the model and from the benchmarking best practices task Section 4 Recommendations outlines recommendations based upon the findings 1 Throughout this report we use the terms diversity and workforce standing alone When we do so they always refer to diversity with respect to gender race and ethnicity and the attorney workforce in the eleven studied components ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE § KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 2 Appendices provide additional information referenced in the text They include additional reference materials graphs and bibliographies of sources used ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE § KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 2 Appendices provide additional information referenced in the text They include additional reference materials graphs and bibliographies of sources used ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 3 2 Methodology 2 Methodology This section details the study methodology from initial design through implementation This section details the study methodology from initial design through implementation 2 1 Analytical framework and Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity 2 1 Analytical framework and Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity The Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity a model developed and implemented by Taylor Cox Associates for dozens of diversity assessments provided the analytical framework for this study 2 In the most recent application of the model at Alcoa it was shown to produce significant measurable change in the climate for diversity in two large manufacturing operations of the company The Interactional Model’s principal tenet is that the diversity climate combines with or interacts with the diversity of the workforce to produce outcomes of work both at the individual level e g individual job performance individual compensation etc and at the organizational level e g workforce productivity workforce attrition etc The Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity a model developed and implemented by Taylor Cox Associates for dozens of diversity assessments provided the analytical framework for this study 2 In the most recent application of the model at Alcoa it was shown to produce significant measurable change in the climate for diversity in two large manufacturing operations of the company The Interactional Model’s principal tenet is that the diversity climate combines with or interacts with the diversity of the workforce to produce outcomes of work both at the individual level e g individual job performance individual compensation etc and at the organizational level e g workforce productivity workforce attrition etc Because the Department sought to focus primarily on the issues of recruiting hiring promotion and retention we adapted the model to collect data on these areas—as well as on corollary outcomes which are related to these areas—and the diversity climate factors most relevant in determining these model outcomes The following figure depicts the adapted Interactional Model used for the study Because the Department sought to focus primarily on the issues of recruiting hiring promotion and retention we adapted the model to collect data on these areas—as well as on corollary outcomes which are related to these areas—and the diversity climate factors most relevant in determining these model outcomes The following figure depicts the adapted Interactional Model used for the study 2 Adapted with permission from Cox Jr Taylor 1993 Cultural Diversity in Organizations San Francisco CA Berrett-Koehler 2 Adapted with permission from Cox Jr Taylor 1993 Cultural Diversity in Organizations San Francisco CA Berrett-Koehler ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE JUNE 14 2002 KPMG CONSULTING PAGE 4 Figure 2 1 0 1 Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity adapted with permission from Cox 1993 B E N DIVERSITY CLIMATE Individual-level factors • Identity profiles • Prejudice • Stereotyping • Personality Group-level factors • Cultural differences • Ethnocentrism • Intergroup conflict C H M A R K I G B First-level • Recruiting • Hiring • Retention • Creativity i nnovation • Problem solving • Workgroup cohesiveness and commu nication Affective outcomes • Job career satisfaction • Organizational identification • Job involvement Achievement outcomes • Performance appraisal • Promotion • Compensation • Awards Second-level • Achievement of formal organizational goals Organization-level factors • Culture and acculturation process • Structural integration • Informal integration • Institutional bias in human resource systems data collection existing workforce data data collection surveys interviews and focus groups T R A T E G E N DIVERSITY CLIMATE Individual-level factors • Identity profiles • Prejudice • Stereotyping • Personality Group-level factors • Cultural differences • Ethnocentrism • Intergroup conflict Y Note Elements in gray are parts of the template IMCD model that were not studied in this project C H M A R K I PAGE 4 N G ORGANIZATIONAL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUAL CAREER OUTCOMES First-level • Recruiting • Hiring • Retention • Creativity i nnovation • Problem solving • Workgroup cohesiveness and commu nication Affective outcomes • Job career satisfaction • Organizational identification • Job involvement Achievement outcomes • Performance appraisal • Promotion • Compensation • Awards Second-level • Achievement of formal organizational goals Organization-level factors • Culture and acculturation process • Structural integration • Informal integration • Institutional bias in human resource systems data collection existing workforce data data collection surveys interviews and focus groups data collection surveys S JUNE 14 2002 KPMG CONSULTING Figure 2 1 0 1 Interactional Model of Cultural Diversity adapted with permission from Cox 1993 N ORGANIZATIONAL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUAL CAREER OUTCOMES ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE data collection surveys S T R A T E G Y Note Elements in gray are parts of the template IMCD model that were not studied in this project ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 5 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 5 We selected this model for the study for a number of reasons First it provides a comprehensive view of the factors that require attention if an organization aspires to attract retain and leverage the full potential of a diverse workforce Second the model is based on leading-edge theory and empirical research about phenomena related to diversity Third as mentioned earlier the model has been demonstrated to produce measurable results when applied with diligence over a reasonable period of time 3 We selected this model for the study for a number of reasons First it provides a comprehensive view of the factors that require attention if an organization aspires to attract retain and leverage the full potential of a diverse workforce Second the model is based on leading-edge theory and empirical research about phenomena related to diversity Third as mentioned earlier the model has been demonstrated to produce measurable results when applied with diligence over a reasonable period of time 3 An important part of the study was to provide a definition of diversity in light of the model and DOJ’s goals While workforce composition is an important dimension of workforce diversity there is increasing recognition in the federal government management community4 that true workforce diversity must mean more than just appropriate representation of all gender and racial ethnic groups in the workforce A well-balanced diversity effort must also include creating an environment in which people of all cultural and social backgrounds can achieve their potential unencumbered by barriers related to their personal identity e g as women as Hispanics etc A central characteristic of such an environment is that people of all gender and racial ethnic backgrounds perceive the same level of job satisfaction organizational identification career development prospects and other individual outcomes Such efforts are more focused on retention and creating a diversity climate that will make recruitment easier in the future An important part of the study was to provide a definition of diversity in light of the model and DOJ’s goals While workforce composition is an important dimension of workforce diversity there is increasing recognition in the federal government management community4 that true workforce diversity must mean more than just appropriate representation of all gender and racial ethnic groups in the workforce A well-balanced diversity effort must also include creating an environment in which people of all cultural and social backgrounds can achieve their potential unencumbered by barriers related to their personal identity e g as women as Hispanics etc A central characteristic of such an environment is that people of all gender and racial ethnic backgrounds perceive the same level of job satisfaction organizational identification career development prospects and other individual outcomes Such efforts are more focused on retention and creating a diversity climate that will make recruitment easier in the future To understand why these environmental or climate factors are as important as workforcecomposition outcomes consider an organization that had achieved appropriate representation of women and minorities at all levels of its hierarchy but did not achieve parity in the positive climate factors The likely result would be that women and or minorities would be leaving the organization at a greater rate than men and or whites so that the organization would have to recruit a larger proportion of women and or minorities to counteract their higher attrition Thus at any given time the organization would appear to have no diversity problem if diversity were defined only in terms of the numerical composition of the workforce However the organization’s hiring and attrition patterns would be masking what is a bona fide diversity problem—that women and or minorities were not as satisfied or successful as they could be In turn the organization would not able to realize the full potential of a diverse workforce To understand why these environmental or climate factors are as important as workforcecomposition outcomes consider an organization that had achieved appropriate representation of women and minorities at all levels of its hierarchy but did not achieve parity in the positive climate factors The likely result would be that women and or minorities would be leaving the organization at a greater rate than men and or whites so that the organization would have to recruit a larger proportion of women and or minorities to counteract their higher attrition Thus at any given time the organization would appear to have no diversity problem if diversity were defined only in terms of the numerical composition of the workforce However the organization’s hiring and attrition patterns would be masking what is a bona fide diversity problem—that women and or minorities were not as satisfied or successful as they could be In turn the organization would not able to realize the full potential of a diverse workforce Therefore for the purpose of this study we propose that the Department of Justice use the following definition to characterize its diversity goals Therefore for the purpose of this study we propose that the Department of Justice use the following definition to characterize its diversity goals 3 For details see Cox Jr Taylor 2001 Creating the Multicultural Organization San Francisco CA Jossey-Bass 4 See e g U S General Accounting Office 1997 Hispanic Employment Best Practices Used by Selected Agencies and Companies GAO GGD-97-46 and U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1997 Best Equal Employment Opportunity Policies Programs and Practices in the Private Sector EEOC 3 For details see Cox Jr Taylor 2001 Creating the Multicultural Organization San Francisco CA Jossey-Bass 4 See e g U S General Accounting Office 1997 Hispanic Employment Best Practices Used by Selected Agencies and Companies GAO GGD-97-46 and U S Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1997 Best Equal Employment Opportunity Policies Programs and Practices in the Private Sector EEOC ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 6 Workforce diversity is achieved at DOJ when § § Female and racial ethnic minorities are represented at all levels of the Department at a rate consistent with their representation in the overall population of attorneys government and non-government in the United States All gender and racial ethnic groups of attorneys achieve parity in job satisfaction and perceptions of fairness in the work climate ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 6 Workforce diversity is achieved at DOJ when § § Female and racial ethnic minorities are represented at all levels of the Department at a rate consistent with their representation in the overall population of attorneys government and non-government in the United States All gender and racial ethnic groups of attorneys achieve parity in job satisfaction and perceptions of fairness in the work climate The definition makes a few key points about diversity at DOJ that should not be overlooked First of all women and minorities should be sufficiently represented at all levels of the Department meaning in both attorney staff and management positions Also we suggest that the relevant comparison be made to the market of attorneys in the United States This may not necessarily represent the true applicable labor force for the Department as employment law teaches us that a true applicable labor force is the population of those qualified individuals interested in working in an organization However given that DOJ attorneys practice in virtually every field of law its client base is the entire nation its legal adversaries may be virtually any type of practitioner it practices in every jurisdiction in the nation and the market views DOJ attorney jobs as attractive the entire population of lawyers in the U S may be used as a reasonable proxy for the DOJ labor force The definition makes a few key points about diversity at DOJ that should not be overlooked First of all women and minorities should be sufficiently represented at all levels of the Department meaning in both attorney staff and management positions Also we suggest that the relevant comparison be made to the market of attorneys in the United States This may not necessarily represent the true applicable labor force for the Department as employment law teaches us that a true applicable labor force is the population of those qualified individuals interested in working in an organization However given that DOJ attorneys practice in virtually every field of law its client base is the entire nation its legal adversaries may be virtually any type of practitioner it practices in every jurisdiction in the nation and the market views DOJ attorney jobs as attractive the entire population of lawyers in the U S may be used as a reasonable proxy for the DOJ labor force This definition which reflects the premise of the Interactional Model informed the study throughout This definition which reflects the premise of the Interactional Model informed the study throughout ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 7 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 2 2 Data collection techniques 2 2 Data collection techniques Data collection and analysis for the study consisted of five principal modes of data Data collection and analysis for the study consisted of five principal modes of data § § § § § qualitative analysis of human resources practices including interviews with human resources administrators in each component and analysis of organizational issues which affect the diversity climate analysis of existing workforce data including composition recruiting and hiring promotion and retention of the attorney workforce focus groups and individual interviews with supervisory and non-supervisory attorneys across gender race ethnicity job classification component and geographic groups interviews with DOJ senior career and political leadership in the eleven components and Justice Management Division JMD and an employee survey administered in person at the conclusion of focus groups and via the Internet department-wide § § § § § PAGE 7 qualitative analysis of human resources practices including interviews with human resources administrators in each component and analysis of organizational issues which affect the diversity climate analysis of existing workforce data including composition recruiting and hiring promotion and retention of the attorney workforce focus groups and individual interviews with supervisory and non-supervisory attorneys across gender race ethnicity job classification component and geographic groups interviews with DOJ senior career and political leadership in the eleven components and Justice Management Division JMD and an employee survey administered in person at the conclusion of focus groups and via the Internet department-wide The combination of these different modes of data allows us to formulate insight on the design and impact of the Department’s HR management practices in the context of the Interactional Model The combination of these different modes of data allows us to formulate insight on the design and impact of the Department’s HR management practices in the context of the Interactional Model The remainder of this section discusses the rationale methodology and limitations of each data mode Section 2 3 presents the inventory of results from each of the modes Section 3 presents integrated findings based on a synthesis of analysis across the modes The remainder of this section discusses the rationale methodology and limitations of each data mode Section 2 3 presents the inventory of results from each of the modes Section 3 presents integrated findings based on a synthesis of analysis across the modes 2 2 1 Analysis of human resources practices 2 2 1 Analysis of human resources practices Primarily through interviews with component human resources administrators and also through reviews of documents provided by the administrators we sought to characterize the Department’s human resources practices—especially in the areas of recruiting hiring promotion and retention particularly as they relate to diversity Primarily through interviews with component human resources administrators and also through reviews of documents provided by the administrators we sought to characterize the Department’s human resources practices—especially in the areas of recruiting hiring promotion and retention particularly as they relate to diversity We interviewed managers in the Executive Offices including members of the personnel staffs of the Litigating Divisions managers responsible for attorney human resource management in the General Counsel offices of the INS and Bureau of Prisons members of the front office and General Counsel office of the Executive Office for U S Trustees and members of the front offices equal employment opportunity offices and personnel staffs of EOIR and the Executive Office for U S Attorneys We interviewed managers in the Executive Offices including members of the personnel staffs of the Litigating Divisions managers responsible for attorney human resource management in the General Counsel offices of the INS and Bureau of Prisons members of the front office and General Counsel office of the Executive Office for U S Trustees and members of the front offices equal employment opportunity offices and personnel staffs of EOIR and the Executive Office for U S Attorneys We also interviewed managers of the Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management OARM a specialized office in JMD responsible for certain human resources management functions for certain segments of the attorney population the JMD Equal Employment Opportunity Staff and the JMD Finance Staff which handles attorney personnel records We also interviewed managers of the Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management OARM a specialized office in JMD responsible for certain human resources management functions for certain segments of the attorney population the JMD Equal Employment Opportunity Staff and the JMD Finance Staff which handles attorney personnel records ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 8 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 8 2 2 2 Analysis of workforce data 2 2 2 Analysis of workforce data We obtained data on the current and recent attorney workforces from the JMD Finance Staff and data on entry-level applicants and hires from OARM We sought to analyze this data to determine patterns in composition hiring performance evaluation promotion bonus awards career growth and attrition in the attorney workforce We obtained data on the current and recent attorney workforces from the JMD Finance Staff and data on entry-level applicants and hires from OARM We sought to analyze this data to determine patterns in composition hiring performance evaluation promotion bonus awards career growth and attrition in the attorney workforce However the following data limitations constrained our analysis However the following data limitations constrained our analysis § § § DOJ did not migrate to the National Finance Center NFC a government-wide mainframe personnel system until April 1993 and no usable personnel records prior to that time are available A change in record keeping in 1997 resulted in personnel records prior to that time being unreliable Electronic data on performance evaluations do not exist § § § DOJ did not migrate to the National Finance Center NFC a government-wide mainframe personnel system until April 1993 and no usable personnel records prior to that time are available A change in record keeping in 1997 resulted in personnel records prior to that time being unreliable Electronic data on performance evaluations do not exist We also learned from HR administrators throughout the study that data from NFC are of questionable reliability because of limitations of the system and imperfect record-keeping practices on the part of those who generate the data to be entered into the system We also learned from HR administrators throughout the study that data from NFC are of questionable reliability because of limitations of the system and imperfect record-keeping practices on the part of those who generate the data to be entered into the system The most significant consequence of these data limitations is that we could not ascertain the start date or employment histories of attorneys prior to April 1993 This impacts any analysis that takes tenure into account for all but attorneys who were hired after April 1993 Additionally we were told by the Finance Staff that we could not conduct any analysis of personnel records that were generated before 1997 with a high degree of confidence The most significant consequence of these data limitations is that we could not ascertain the start date or employment histories of attorneys prior to April 1993 This impacts any analysis that takes tenure into account for all but attorneys who were hired after April 1993 Additionally we were told by the Finance Staff that we could not conduct any analysis of personnel records that were generated before 1997 with a high degree of confidence In this report we present results of analyses that we were able to conduct in light of these limitations and we believe that the data used and results obtained are valid For data in 1997 and after we presented several results to the Finance Staff for validation In this report we present results of analyses that we were able to conduct in light of these limitations and we believe that the data used and results obtained are valid For data in 1997 and after we presented several results to the Finance Staff for validation The data extract that we received is as of December 31 2001 Thus in the text when we refer to ‘”current workforce ” that actually means the workforce as of that date The data extract that we received is as of December 31 2001 Thus in the text when we refer to ‘”current workforce ” that actually means the workforce as of that date 2 2 3 Focus groups and individual interviews 2 2 3 Focus groups and individual interviews The most extensive form of data collection that we used for the study was focus groups and individual interviews with staff and management attorneys We interviewed a representative number of whites minorities men and women and a representative number of managers and staff We stratified the interview and focus group data collection across the eleven components such that all are represented in the results The most extensive form of data collection that we used for the study was focus groups and individual interviews with staff and management attorneys We interviewed a representative number of whites minorities men and women and a representative number of managers and staff We stratified the interview and focus group data collection across the eleven components such that all are represented in the results The high-level interview topics for the focus groups and individual interviews are provided in appendix A The high-level interview topics for the focus groups and individual interviews are provided in appendix A ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 9 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 9 Participant selection Participant selection We developed a data collection strategy to account for the population of attorneys in each studied component as well as for diversity in terms of geography and demographics of the component We also collected data at field sites5 based on the number of components present and areas where minority groups tended to have higher representation to help broaden the interview pool The outcome of this strategy was a data collection plan that specified target focus group and individual sample sizes by component demographic and location We developed a data collection strategy to account for the population of attorneys in each studied component as well as for diversity in terms of geography and demographics of the component We also collected data at field sites5 based on the number of components present and areas where minority groups tended to have higher representation to help broaden the interview pool The outcome of this strategy was a data collection plan that specified target focus group and individual sample sizes by component demographic and location For focus groups and individual interviews it is imperative that a control mechanism be put in place to reduce the likelihood of any forms of bias regarding selection In the case of the DOJ focus groups as well as individual interviews we employed a very straightforward selection process in light of the devised data collection plan that attempted to select a random sample of attorneys for each session The specific methodology employed varied according to the component but overall the process remained consistent For focus groups and individual interviews it is imperative that a control mechanism be put in place to reduce the likelihood of any forms of bias regarding selection In the case of the DOJ focus groups as well as individual interviews we employed a very straightforward selection process in light of the devised data collection plan that attempted to select a random sample of attorneys for each session The specific methodology employed varied according to the component but overall the process remained consistent KPMG Consulting relied heavily on our component contacts who were managers designated by each component head to facilitate our data collection within that component Due to the short duration of data collection and our lack of direct access to the attorney population we asked the component contacts to assist us in selecting the samples of interview subjects For the most part the contacts provided a list of attorneys including their demographic groups from which we randomly selected participants for either focus groups or individual interviews Other components disseminated an open interview invitation that asked attorneys to respond to a KPMG Consulting representative with their particular demographic group and time slot of interest Upon receiving the list of volunteers we randomly selected those candidates to be interviewed In both cases we relied on the DOJ component contacts to identify the relevant population of attorneys and disseminate these requests During the course of the study it became apparent that most attorneys tended to select out of focus groups and into individual interviews due to the increased confidentiality As a result we shifted our data collection approach somewhat to hold more individual interviews and fewer focus groups KPMG Consulting relied heavily on our component contacts who were managers designated by each component head to facilitate our data collection within that component Due to the short duration of data collection and our lack of direct access to the attorney population we asked the component contacts to assist us in selecting the samples of interview subjects For the most part the contacts provided a list of attorneys including their demographic groups from which we randomly selected participants for either focus groups or individual interviews Other components disseminated an open interview invitation that asked attorneys to respond to a KPMG Consulting representative with their particular demographic group and time slot of interest Upon receiving the list of volunteers we randomly selected those candidates to be interviewed In both cases we relied on the DOJ component contacts to identify the relevant population of attorneys and disseminate these requests During the course of the study it became apparent that most attorneys tended to select out of focus groups and into individual interviews due to the increased confidentiality As a result we shifted our data collection approach somewhat to hold more individual interviews and fewer focus groups It became apparent that a fear of adverse repercussions from participating in this study was very real for many attorneys It became apparent that a fear of adverse repercussions from participating in this study was very real for many attorneys Focus group methodology Focus group methodology Focus groups are an efficient way to collect data that is somewhat less structured and more robust than results from a closed-ended attitudinal survey For this study we convened a series of focus groups comprised of a target of between six and ten respondents each All but a few focus groups were homogeneous with respect to component job level supervisory or nonsupervisory and demographic group We divided the population into five demographics white males white females gender-mixed African-Americans gender-mixed Hispanics and gendermixed other minorities In areas with small populations some focus groups consisted of gendermixed sets of all non-white racial ethnic groups For managers in virtually all cases our data Focus groups are an efficient way to collect data that is somewhat less structured and more robust than results from a closed-ended attitudinal survey For this study we convened a series of focus groups comprised of a target of between six and ten respondents each All but a few focus groups were homogeneous with respect to component job level supervisory or nonsupervisory and demographic group We divided the population into five demographics white males white females gender-mixed African-Americans gender-mixed Hispanics and gendermixed other minorities In areas with small populations some focus groups consisted of gendermixed sets of all non-white racial ethnic groups For managers in virtually all cases our data 5 Field sites visited were Denver CO San Francisco CA Los Angeles CA Miami FL Dallas TX and New York NY 5 Field sites visited were Denver CO San Francisco CA Los Angeles CA Miami FL Dallas TX and New York NY ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 10 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 10 collection was via individual interviews or small group interviews with the management team of a component or office within a component collection was via individual interviews or small group interviews with the management team of a component or office within a component In most cases the facilitator of the group a trained and experienced moderator from KPMG Consulting or Taylor Cox Associates was of the same demographic group as the participants In our experience having homogeneous focus groups with a moderator of the same demographic maximizes subjects’ candor In most cases the facilitator of the group a trained and experienced moderator from KPMG Consulting or Taylor Cox Associates was of the same demographic group as the participants In our experience having homogeneous focus groups with a moderator of the same demographic maximizes subjects’ candor For the focus groups and individual interviews we employed a series of high-level questions— asking about the work climate recruiting and hiring promotions case assignments and previous diversity initiatives of which the group was aware The interview protocol is provided in appendix A For the focus groups and individual interviews we employed a series of high-level questions— asking about the work climate recruiting and hiring promotions case assignments and previous diversity initiatives of which the group was aware The interview protocol is provided in appendix A Using both focus groups and individual interviews to increase robustness Using both focus groups and individual interviews to increase robustness In a focus group it is important to leverage the group dynamic but not let it alter results This group dynamic allows individuals to react to statements made by their peers and in some cases enables the group to attain a consensus on their own terms On the other hand it is important that participants do not get unduly swayed by a particularly charismatic member of the group In a focus group it is important to leverage the group dynamic but not let it alter results This group dynamic allows individuals to react to statements made by their peers and in some cases enables the group to attain a consensus on their own terms On the other hand it is important that participants do not get unduly swayed by a particularly charismatic member of the group For this reason we used both individual interviews and focus groups to collect data In individual interviews we asked the participant directly about a number of issues such as whether he she believes that men and women have an equal opportunity to be promoted and used the results to compute objective statistics and corresponding tests to determine whether men and women as well as whites and minorities answered differently from each other We asked the same questions in focus groups and indicated the consensus of the group when there was one but did not use the group results for statistical tests For this reason we used both individual interviews and focus groups to collect data In individual interviews we asked the participant directly about a number of issues such as whether he she believes that men and women have an equal opportunity to be promoted and used the results to compute objective statistics and corresponding tests to determine whether men and women as well as whites and minorities answered differently from each other We asked the same questions in focus groups and indicated the consensus of the group when there was one but did not use the group results for statistical tests In general responses were similar in individual interviews and focus groups In general responses were similar in individual interviews and focus groups Self-selected nature of participation Self-selected nature of participation For all modes of data collection in the study—and in any study in which participation is not compulsory—participation is inherently self-selected That is we will only obtain the input of individuals who choose to provide it For all modes of data collection in the study—and in any study in which participation is not compulsory—participation is inherently self-selected That is we will only obtain the input of individuals who choose to provide it It is a tenet of survey research that self-selected participants may not give representative results At the very least in some studies only individuals with more emphatic opinions are likely to participate if everyone is given an equal chance to participate It is also possible in a study that not only are individuals with more emphatic opinions likely to participate but individuals with more emphatic opinions of a certain nature—for example either particularly negative opinions or particularly positive opinions—are likely to participate It is a tenet of survey research that self-selected participants may not give representative results At the very least in some studies only individuals with more emphatic opinions are likely to participate if everyone is given an equal chance to participate It is also possible in a study that not only are individuals with more emphatic opinions likely to participate but individuals with more emphatic opinions of a certain nature—for example either particularly negative opinions or particularly positive opinions—are likely to participate Thus it is important in a study such as this to limit the ability of self-selection to undermine the validity of the results Both the research design and conduct of data collection can assist in assuring validity and we incorporated such techniques in the design of this study Thus it is important in a study such as this to limit the ability of self-selection to undermine the validity of the results Both the research design and conduct of data collection can assist in assuring validity and we incorporated such techniques in the design of this study ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE § § § KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 11 Including a broad base of opinion in the study We included opinion from all eleven components including all racial and gender demographics and job levels in a variety of geographic locales to ensure that no stratum of the population had undue influence on the results Because the climate is so varied across DOJ this approach reduced the likelihood that the sample was tainted Moreover including the survey results in our findings means that the opinion of over 1 400 DOJ attorneys informed the results of the study Skillfully moderating with a well-defined agenda For each interview and focus group we had a specific agenda of questions to answer Thus if an individual came to the group with a specific agenda of his her own it would be confined to the discussion of general comments and be less likely to permeate the individual’s response to any specific questions Additionally we used experienced and skilled moderators who focused on the answers to the questions and did not allow individuals’ preconceptions to unduly influence the results or the opinions of others in the group Including a variety of data collection modes Using interviews focus groups and surveys reduces the ability of self-selection to impact the results because the nature of data collected is varied Agreement between the themes manifested in each mode indicates stability—and validity—of results We discuss our analytical approach to the various data modes in section 2 4 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE § § § KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 11 Including a broad base of opinion in the study We included opinion from all eleven components including all racial and gender demographics and job levels in a variety of geographic locales to ensure that no stratum of the population had undue influence on the results Because the climate is so varied across DOJ this approach reduced the likelihood that the sample was tainted Moreover including the survey results in our findings means that the opinion of over 1 400 DOJ attorneys informed the results of the study Skillfully moderating with a well-defined agenda For each interview and focus group we had a specific agenda of questions to answer Thus if an individual came to the group with a specific agenda of his her own it would be confined to the discussion of general comments and be less likely to permeate the individual’s response to any specific questions Additionally we used experienced and skilled moderators who focused on the answers to the questions and did not allow individuals’ preconceptions to unduly influence the results or the opinions of others in the group Including a variety of data collection modes Using interviews focus groups and surveys reduces the ability of self-selection to impact the results because the nature of data collected is varied Agreement between the themes manifested in each mode indicates stability—and validity—of results We discuss our analytical approach to the various data modes in section 2 4 Respondent self-selection can impact any study in this study we were aware of the issues and incorporated several measures to limit its impact Respondent self-selection can impact any study in this study we were aware of the issues and incorporated several measures to limit its impact Anonymity Anonymity Anonymity of participants was essential given the sensitivity of the subject Many interview subjects expressed concern about anonymity and we assured them that it would be protected in the sense that no individual findings would be attributed to any individual We also protected the confidentiality of individuals’ participation subject to the limitation of some components’ requirement to involve HR administrators and or attorney supervisors in participant selection DOJ should be cognizant of the importance participants placed on anonymity Anonymity of participants was essential given the sensitivity of the subject Many interview subjects expressed concern about anonymity and we assured them that it would be protected in the sense that no individual findings would be attributed to any individual We also protected the confidentiality of individuals’ participation subject to the limitation of some components’ requirement to involve HR administrators and or attorney supervisors in participant selection DOJ should be cognizant of the importance participants placed on anonymity Respondent receptiveness Respondent receptiveness Despite our difficulty at times to recruit participants for the focus groups and individual interviews we found the vast majority of subjects to be quite receptive to the study Most expressed the view the project had value and participated thoughtfully and as far as we can ascertain truthfully Many expressed concern that numerous similar studies had been conducted in the past without much follow-up action but still most were not cynical about the effort and envisioned that the study would yield positive results for the Department Despite our difficulty at times to recruit participants for the focus groups and individual interviews we found the vast majority of subjects to be quite receptive to the study Most expressed the view the project had value and participated thoughtfully and as far as we can ascertain truthfully Many expressed concern that numerous similar studies had been conducted in the past without much follow-up action but still most were not cynical about the effort and envisioned that the study would yield positive results for the Department ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 12 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 12 2 2 4 Interviews with senior leadership 2 2 4 Interviews with senior leadership We interviewed JMD and component managers both career and political appointees at the Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Attorney General and equivalent levels We sought to ascertain these individuals’ perspectives on the same issues as in the individual interviews as well as other issues relevant to each of their perspectives We interviewed JMD and component managers both career and political appointees at the Assistant Attorney General Deputy Assistant Attorney General and equivalent levels We sought to ascertain these individuals’ perspectives on the same issues as in the individual interviews as well as other issues relevant to each of their perspectives 2 2 5 Employee survey 2 2 5 Employee survey We also conducted an attitudinal survey of employees The survey which was an adaptation of the survey typically used by Taylor Cox Associates for diversity assessments such as this one contained 35 questions some questions had multiple parts a total of 51 items were assessed each tied to one of the diversity climate or individual outcome elements of the Interactional Model We administered the survey in person to attorneys who participated in focus groups and individual interviews and made the survey available to all Department attorneys via the Internet We also conducted an attitudinal survey of employees The survey which was an adaptation of the survey typically used by Taylor Cox Associates for diversity assessments such as this one contained 35 questions some questions had multiple parts a total of 51 items were assessed each tied to one of the diversity climate or individual outcome elements of the Interactional Model We administered the survey in person to attorneys who participated in focus groups and individual interviews and made the survey available to all Department attorneys via the Internet 2 2 6 Summary of data collection techniques 2 2 6 Summary of data collection techniques Our data collection methodology was intended to regard each issue in the study from a variety of approaches This methodology increases our confidence in the results of the study Our data collection methodology was intended to regard each issue in the study from a variety of approaches This methodology increases our confidence in the results of the study ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 13 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 13 2 3 Inventory of data collected 2 3 Inventory of data collected This section discusses the volume of data that we collected and used for the study This section discusses the volume of data that we collected and used for the study Interviews and focus groups Interviews and focus groups We conducted a total of 27 focus groups and 140 individual interviews Overall the response rates for the focus groups and individual interviews were lower than we expected While statistically valid both department-wide and with respect to attorneys’ representation by gender race ethnicity and component6 the level of participation is cause for concern about the importance attributed to the study by Department attorneys We found that not only was the number of attorneys who responded to solicitations to participate in interviews and focus groups low but a significant number of attorneys who registered for sessions racial and ethnic minorities and females as well as white males did not attend We conducted a total of 27 focus groups and 140 individual interviews Overall the response rates for the focus groups and individual interviews were lower than we expected While statistically valid both department-wide and with respect to attorneys’ representation by gender race ethnicity and component6 the level of participation is cause for concern about the importance attributed to the study by Department attorneys We found that not only was the number of attorneys who responded to solicitations to participate in interviews and focus groups low but a significant number of attorneys who registered for sessions racial and ethnic minorities and females as well as white males did not attend Roughly 25% of those attorneys who agreed to participate did not attend their scheduled interview sessions Upon further review it became apparent that certain components such as U S Attorneys’ Offices and INS and attorneys in the field had a higher rate of no-shows Additionally no consistent pattern emerged regarding race or gender relating to no-shows throughout the study One reason behind these no-shows likely was the short lead time for scheduling interviews combined with the complexity of an attorneys’ schedules However many attorneys in different components who were interviewed throughout the country made this study a priority and did attend We also conducted individual phone interviews with some attorneys who could not attend in person Roughly 25% of those attorneys who agreed to participate did not attend their scheduled interview sessions Upon further review it became apparent that certain components such as U S Attorneys’ Offices and INS and attorneys in the field had a higher rate of no-shows Additionally no consistent pattern emerged regarding race or gender relating to no-shows throughout the study One reason behind these no-shows likely was the short lead time for scheduling interviews combined with the complexity of an attorneys’ schedules However many attorneys in different components who were interviewed throughout the country made this study a priority and did attend We also conducted individual phone interviews with some attorneys who could not attend in person The following table shows the total number of attorneys including supervisory and nonsupervisory who contributed to the study in interviews or focus groups The following table shows the total number of attorneys including supervisory and nonsupervisory who contributed to the study in interviews or focus groups Table 2 3 0 1 Interview and focus group participants by gender and race ethnicity group Group White Minority TOTAL ATR CIV CRT CRM ENR TAX BOP EOIR 29 15 44 20 10 30 7 21 28 3 11 14 11 7 18 11 11 22 5 8 13 1 5 6 Group Male Female TOTAL ATR CIV CRT CRM ENR TAX BOP EOIR 21 23 44 12 18 30 12 16 28 7 7 14 7 11 18 8 14 22 4 9 13 3 3 6 INS USA UST 13 20 33 23 40 63 15 1 16 INS USA UST 12 21 33 24 39 63 9 7 16 Table 2 3 0 1 Interview and focus group participants by gender and race ethnicity group JMD Total 6 3 9 144 152 296 JMD Total 2 7 9 121 175 296 Group White Minority TOTAL ATR CIV CRT CRM ENR TAX BOP EOIR 29 15 44 20 10 30 7 21 28 3 11 14 11 7 18 11 11 22 5 8 13 1 5 6 Group Male Female TOTAL ATR CIV CRT CRM ENR TAX BOP EOIR 21 23 44 12 18 30 12 16 28 7 7 14 7 11 18 8 14 22 4 9 13 3 3 6 INS USA UST 13 20 33 23 40 63 15 1 16 INS USA UST 12 21 33 24 39 63 9 7 16 JMD Total 6 3 9 144 152 296 JMD Total 2 7 9 121 175 296 Survey Survey For the survey we received 1 229 valid responses or about 13% of Department attorneys The responses were reasonably representative of Department attorneys with respect to gender For the survey we received 1 229 valid responses or about 13% of Department attorneys The responses were reasonably representative of Department attorneys with respect to gender 6 The numbers depicted in table 2 3 0 1 were more than sufficient on which to base conclusions For example see Sekaran 1994 Research Methods for Business New York NY John Wiley Sons Inc 6 The numbers depicted in table 2 3 0 1 were more than sufficient on which to base conclusions For example see Sekaran 1994 Research Methods for Business New York NY John Wiley Sons Inc ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 14 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 14 race ethnicity and component Our goal was a 20%-25% response rate so results were less than expected race ethnicity and component Our goal was a 20%-25% response rate so results were less than expected This volume of responses is however high by objective standards—the Gallup poll for example uses samples of 1 000 individuals in surveys with questions similar to those used in this study to draw conclusions about the entire American population which is more diverse in many dimensions than the DOJ attorney workforce 7 According to established industry standards therefore the survey is statistically valid for the Department as a whole as well as for the male female white and minority strata This volume of responses is however high by objective standards—the Gallup poll for example uses samples of 1 000 individuals in surveys with questions similar to those used in this study to draw conclusions about the entire American population which is more diverse in many dimensions than the DOJ attorney workforce 7 According to established industry standards therefore the survey is statistically valid for the Department as a whole as well as for the male female white and minority strata All results presented in our findings unless otherwise indicated are of those attorneys who had an opinion about the particular item—that is did not answer “no opinion” or left the item blank The vast majority of participants responded to each question All results presented in our findings unless otherwise indicated are of those attorneys who had an opinion about the particular item—that is did not answer “no opinion” or left the item blank The vast majority of participants responded to each question 7 See e g http www gallup com help FAQs poll1 asp 7 See e g http www gallup com help FAQs poll1 asp ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 15 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 15 2 4 Summary of data collection and analytical approach 2 4 Summary of data collection and analytical approach This section discusses the analytical approach we employed to reach our findings and develop our recommendations given the data that we collected Because the Department needs a systematic approach to diversity we systematically formulated our recommendations to correspond to the elements of the Taylor Cox Associates organizational change model8 This section discusses the analytical approach we employed to reach our findings and develop our recommendations given the data that we collected Because the Department needs a systematic approach to diversity we systematically formulated our recommendations to correspond to the elements of the Taylor Cox Associates organizational change model8 8 Model adapted with permission from Cox 2001 8 Model adapted with permission from Cox 2001 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 16 Figure 2 4 0 1 Organizational change model ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE •Top management commitment and support •Steering and advisory groups •Communications strategy RESEARCH MEASUREMEMENT •Comprehensive organizational assessment •Baseline data •Benchmarking JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 16 Figure 2 4 0 1 Organizational change model FRAMEWORK FOR GUIDING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE FOR MANAGING AND VALUING CULTURAL DIVERSITY LEADERSHIP KPMG CONSULTING EDUCATION •Awareness training •Development of in house expertise •Orientation programs •Advanced training FRAMEWORK FOR GUIDING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE FOR MANAGING AND VALUING CULTURAL DIVERSITY CHANGES IN CULTURE AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS •Recruitment •Orientation •Performance appraisal •Compensation and benefits •Promotion •Training and development FOLLOW -UP •Evaluation process •Accountability •Ensuring continuous improvement LEADERSHIP •Top management commitment and support •Steering and advisory groups •Communications strategy RESEARCH MEASUREMEMENT •Comprehensive organizational assessment •Baseline data •Benchmarking EDUCATION •Awareness training •Development of in house expertise •Orientation programs •Advanced training CHANGES IN CULTURE AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS •Recruitment •Orientation •Performance appraisal •Compensation and benefits •Promotion •Training and development FOLLOW -UP •Evaluation process •Accountability •Ensuring continuous improvement ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 17 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 17 Elements of the model which we believe are especially pertinent to the Department in light of this study are listed in bold and italic Elements of the model which we believe are especially pertinent to the Department in light of this study are listed in bold and italic As discussed in section 2 2 we employed a variety of data collection techniques in an effort to increase the robustness of—and our confidence in—the study findings These techniques were conceived and utilized in a systematic fashion to address the elements of Taylor Cox Associates’ organizational change model As discussed in section 2 2 we employed a variety of data collection techniques in an effort to increase the robustness of—and our confidence in—the study findings These techniques were conceived and utilized in a systematic fashion to address the elements of Taylor Cox Associates’ organizational change model Although we present qualitative and quantitative results from single modes of data throughout the report and sample sizes are statistically valid when we do so our findings and recommendations are based on a synthesis of results from all of the data modes This assures that our recommendations are valid across the Department although more detailed implementation strategies would have to be developed by component see section 4 for a discussion Although we present qualitative and quantitative results from single modes of data throughout the report and sample sizes are statistically valid when we do so our findings and recommendations are based on a synthesis of results from all of the data modes This assures that our recommendations are valid across the Department although more detailed implementation strategies would have to be developed by component see section 4 for a discussion Similarly although we also use information gathered about individual components as representative examples of certain practices or results relevant to the discussion our findings treat the Department as a single unit of analysis Similarly although we also use information gathered about individual components as representative examples of certain practices or results relevant to the discussion our findings treat the Department as a single unit of analysis ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 18 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 3 Findings 3 Findings This section provides our findings for the study It is divided into four subsections This section provides our findings for the study It is divided into four subsections § § § § Section 3 1 Background on organization provides findings about the Department’s organizational structure which informed our data collection and are relevant to the diversity issues discussed in the rest of the subsections These organizational issues are particularly relevant as the Department considers our recommendations and other potential solutions to the findings presented Section 3 2 Diversity climate provides findings for the diversity climate elements of the Interactional Model These findings are based primarily on analysis of results from the individual interviews focus groups and employee survey This section also includes analysis of human resources systems based on interviews with component HR administrators and attorneys Section 3 3 Individual and organization outcomes provides findings for the individual and organizational outcomes elements of the Interactional Model The findings for individual outcomes are based primarily on analysis of results from the employee survey and findings for organizational outcomes are based primarily on analysis of DOJ workforce data Section 3 4 Benchmarking and best practices provides findings of our analysis of HRM practices and outcomes in other public and private organizations Within each section we present our findings and rationale in narrative form with accompanying tables or graphs or references to appendices as needed § § § § PAGE 18 Section 3 1 Background on organization provides findings about the Department’s organizational structure which informed our data collection and are relevant to the diversity issues discussed in the rest of the subsections These organizational issues are particularly relevant as the Department considers our recommendations and other potential solutions to the findings presented Section 3 2 Diversity climate provides findings for the diversity climate elements of the Interactional Model These findings are based primarily on analysis of results from the individual interviews focus groups and employee survey This section also includes analysis of human resources systems based on interviews with component HR administrators and attorneys Section 3 3 Individual and organization outcomes provides findings for the individual and organizational outcomes elements of the Interactional Model The findings for individual outcomes are based primarily on analysis of results from the employee survey and findings for organizational outcomes are based primarily on analysis of DOJ workforce data Section 3 4 Benchmarking and best practices provides findings of our analysis of HRM practices and outcomes in other public and private organizations Within each section we present our findings and rationale in narrative form with accompanying tables or graphs or references to appendices as needed 3 1 Background on organization 3 1 Background on organization The organization of the Department of Justice has a good deal of impact on the work climate that its attorneys face Equally importantly this organization has implications for how the Department can effectuate change in the work climate through human resources practice interventions management directives and cultural tone-setting from the Attorney General’s and Deputy Attorney General’s Offices g p of Justice has a ggood deal of impact p on the work climate that The organization of the Department y face Equally q y importantly p y this organization g p for how the its attorneys has implications p can effectuate change g in the work climate through g human resources ppractice Department g interventions management directives and cultural tone-setting from the Attorney General’s and Deputy Attorney General’s Offices The Department can be characterized as extremely diffuse—administratively culturally and geographically Indeed one senior manager in the Justice Management Division called the Department of Justice a “holding company” for the 38 components including the eleven with the largest number of attorneys which were the exclusive focus of this study Components—and individual geographic offices in the case of the INS Bureau of Prisons and especially U S Attorneys’ Offices and U S Trustees—principally formulate their own human resource practices with little input from “main Justice ” Following is a discussion of the organizational issues surrounding each of the eleven components which impact the work climate and diversity climate p y diffuse—administratively y culturally y and The Department can be characterized as extremely g g p y Indeed one senior manager g in the Justice Management g Division called the geographically p of Justice a “h “holding g company” p y for the 38 components p including g the eleven with the Department g number of attorneys y which were the exclusive focus of this study y Components—and p largest g p offices in the case of the INS Bureau of Prisons and especially p y U S individual ggeographic y Offices and U S Trustees—principally p p y formulate their own human resource ppractices Attorneys’ p from “main Justice ” Following g is a discussion of the organizational g issues with little input surrounding each of the eleven components which impact the work climate and diversity climate ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 19 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 19 Litigating Divisions Litigating Divisions The Litigating Divisions are headquartered in Washington D C with most attorneys practicing there Each Assistant Attorney General AAG and most Deputy Assistant Attorneys General DAAG are located in the main DOJ building but most Executive Officers who serve as the chief administrative officers of the Divisions are not AAGs DAAGs Executive Officers and attorneys agree that even within each Division the human resources administration work climate—and ultimately diversity climate—vary by organizational unit These units known as Branches in the Civil Division and Sections in the other Divisions are clearly the salient work environment and location in which change would actually be implemented for attorneys in the Litigating Divisions In some Sections especially in the Civil Division there exist additional layers of division below the Section level Management of these layers is also influential in establishing the work climate in some cases The Litigating Divisions are headquartered in Washington D C with most attorneys practicing there Each Assistant Attorney General AAG and most Deputy Assistant Attorneys General DAAG are located in the main DOJ building but most Executive Officers who serve as the chief administrative officers of the Divisions are not AAGs DAAGs Executive Officers and attorneys y agree g that even within each Division the human resources administration work climate—and ultimately y diversity y climate—vary y by y organizational g unit These units known as Branches in the Civil Division and Sections in the other Divisions are clearlyy the salient work environment and g would actuallyy be implemented p for attorneys y in the location in which change Litigating g g Divisions In some Sections especially p y in the Civil Division there exist additional layers y of division below the Section level Management of these layers is also influential in establishing the work climate in some cases One of our key findings in this study is that the Section Chief or Branch Director in the Civil Division is extremely pivotal in establishing the work climate in his her Section The Chief who is almost always a member of the Senior Executive Service can be largely responsible for any climate problem in a Section and be largely influential in implementing solutions The Chief is ultimately accountable for the performance of the Section He she is the ultimate supervisor of attorneys and has substantial influence in hiring promotions case assignments and career development He she is the most senior attorney in the Division that most attorneys routinely come into contact with and the most junior attorney that most DAAGs and AAGs routinely come into contact with As mentioned earlier most AAGs and DAAGs are physically separated from their attorney staffs—which has a significant impact on the analysis of these Divisions’ climates and their strategies for implementing change As discussed in the section of this report on recommendations any approach to diversity management in the Litigating Divisions must focus substantially on the Section Chiefs One of our keyy findings g in this studyy is that the Section Chief or Branch Director in the Civil Division is extremelyy pivotal p in establishingg the work climate in his her Section The Chief who is almost always y a member of the Senior Executive Service can be largely g y responsible p for anyy climate pproblem in a Section and be largely g y influential in implementing p g solutions The Chief is ultimatelyy accountable for the pperformance of the Section He she is the ultimate supervisor p of attorneys y and has substantial influence in hiring g ppromotions case assignments g and career development p He she is the most senior attorney y in the Division that most attorneys routinelyy come into contact with and the most jjunior attorneyy that most DAAGs and AAGs routinelyy come into contact with As mentioned earlier most AAGs and DAAGs are pphysically y separated sepa ated from o their t e attorney atto ey staffs—which sta s w c has as a significant s g ca t impact pact oon the t e analysis a a ys s of o these t ese Divisions’ climates and their strategies g for implementing p g change g As discussed in the section of this report p on recommendations any y approach pp to diversity y management in the Litigating Divisions must focus substantially on the Section Chiefs Virtually all Sections also have Deputy and or Assistant Chiefs or Directors The influence on human resources management and diversity climate that these individuals have varies widely and is significant in some cases In most Sections these individuals participate substantially in hiring decisions in some they handle most case assignments and in a few they have formal supervisory duties Virtuallyy all Sections also have Deputy p y and or Assistant Chiefs or Directors The influence on human resources management g and diversityy climate that these individuals have varies widelyy and is significant g in some cases In most Sections these individuals pparticipate p substantially in hiring decisions in some they handle most case assignments and in a few they have formal supervisory duties We found that these Deputy and Assistant Chief and similar positions are also important to the diversity climate for a number of reasons We found that these Deputy p y and Assistant Chief and similar positions are also important to the diversity climate for a number of reasons § § Their human resources management role gives them influence on the environment in the organization Many of the positions were created partially to increase the number of management opportunities available in their respective divisions Given the low turnover in the Chief positions Divisions created these Deputy and Assistant Chief positions partially to serve as a place into which to promote talented attorneys thereby serving as a retention tool Most attorneys and Executive Office personnel to whom we spoke indicated that although turnover in these positions is also low they are somewhat § § Their human resources management role gives them influence on the environment in the organization g Many y of the ppositions were created ppartially y to increase the number of management g opportunities pp available in their respective p divisions Given the low turnover in the Chief positions p Divisions created these Deputy p y and Assistant Chief ppositions partially p to serve as a pplace into which to promote p y therebyy servingg as a talented attorneys retention tool Most attorneys y and Executive Office personnel p to whom we spoke p indicated that although turnover in these positions is also low they are somewhat ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE § KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 20 successful in their aim to create an additional rung in the career ladder for talented attorneys These positions are more diverse than the Chief positions but less diverse than the attorney population as a whole and the GS-15 population as a whole ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 20 successful in their aim to create an additional rung in the career ladder for talented attorneys y These ppositions are more diverse than the Chief ppositions but less diverse than the attorney population n as a whole and the GS-15 population as a whole w § In all we found that the Litigating Divisions are generally viewed as a better place to work than other components except U S Attorneys’ Offices This is due to the greater opportunity for advancement see section 3 2 7 4 more desirable cases the higher profile and greater prestige that these components carry and their organizational structure which promotes autonomy In all we found that the Litigating g g Divisions are generally g y viewed as a better place p to work than other components p except p U S Attorneys’ y Offices This is due to t the greater g opportunity pp y for advancement see section 3 2 7 4 more desirable cases the higher g pprofile and ggreater pprestige that these components carry and their organizational structure which promotes autonomy Immigration and Naturalization Service Immigration and Naturalization Service Most INS attorneys are located in the field The INS General Counsel oversees three Regions each headed by a Regional Counsel one of whom is an SES member and 32 District offices each headed by a District Counsel The District Counsel who are in most cases the only GS-15 attorneys in the component and some of whom have deputies are the day-to-day supervisors for the INS attorney workforce The organizational culture varies by office and is influenced by the leadership in each office and the Regional Counsel that oversees it Most INS attorneys are located in the field The INS General Counsel oversees three Regions each headed by a Regional Counsel one of whom is an SES member and 32 District offices each headed by a District Counsel The District Counsel who are in most cases the only GS-15 p are the day-to-day y y supervisors p attorneys in the component and some of whom have deputies for g y office and is influenced by the the INS attorneyy workforce The organizational culture varies by leadership in each office and the Regional Counsel that oversees it Executive Office for Immigration Review Executive Office for Immigration Review Most EOIR attorneys are located in Falls Church VA in the General Counsel’s office or as staff support to the Board of Immigration Appeals The component also has a significant field presence but most EOIR staff located in the field are immigration judges who were not covered in this study The promotion potential for staff attorneys is GS-15 Most EOIR attorneys are located in Falls Church VA in the General Counsel’s office or as staff support to the Board of Immigration Appeals The component also has a significant field presence but most EOIR staff located in the field are immigration judges who were not covered in this study The promotion potential for staff attorneys is GS-15 Bureau of Prisons Bureau of Prisons Most of the BOP attorney workforce has historically been located in federal prison institutions This organization significantly impacts the work climate in a number of ways y workforce has historically y been located in federal pprison institutions Most of the BOP attorney This organization significantly impacts the work climate in a number of ways § § § § § In most cases only one attorney is present in each facility Thus the attorney does not have colleagues with whom to share ideas and experiences There are few advancement opportunities for attorneys The attorney is frequently called upon to perform non-legal largely administrative duties Federal prison atmospheres are cited as unpleasant places to work especially for professionals Most facilities are geographically isolated in locales with few amenities This factor has been cited as especially adverse to minorities Moreover legal practice is not the core of BOP’s mission unlike the other components involved in the study except to some extent the INS This has resulted in the opinion of attorneys in BOP being characterized by a law-enforcement culture and as a result the attorney workforce being regarded with lower esteem than the law-enforcement workforce throughout the component § In most cases only y one attorneyy is present p in each facility y Thus the attorney does not have colleagues with whom to share ideas and experiences § The attorney is frequently called upon to perform non-legal largely administrative duties Federal prison p atmospheres are cited as unpleasant places to work especially for pprofessionals Most facilities are ggeographically g p y isolated in locales with few amenities This factor has been cited as especially adverse to minorities § § Moreover legal g ppractice is not the core of BOP’s mission unlike the other components p involved in the studyy except p to some extent the INS This has resulted in the opinion p y in of attorneys BOP being g characterized by y a law-enforcement culture and as a result the attorney y workforce being g regarded g with lower esteem than the law-enforcement workforce throughout the component ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 21 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 21 To address these issues BOP recently created six Consolidated Legal Centers or CLCs The CLCs are regionally-based centers where attorneys work and can travel to facilities in their jurisdiction Transition to CLCs is in progress—some attorneys are located at the Centers while others have yet to be reassigned—so it is too early to gauge whether this change will have a positive impact on work climate and diversity but early reports indicate success To address these issues BOP recently y created six Consolidated Legal g Centers or CLCs The CLCs are regionally-based g y y work and can travel to facilities in their centers where attorneys jjurisdiction Transition to CLCs is in progress—some p g y are located at the Centers while attorneys others have yyet to be reassigned—so g it is too early y to ggauge g whether this change g will have a positive impact on work climate and diversity but early reports indicate success U S Attorneys’ Offices U S Attorneys’ Offices The U S Attorneys’ Offices are the flagship of the Department’s legal workforce consisting of about half of Department attorneys These positions are highly sought after including as transfers from other DOJ components The U S Attorneys’ y Offices are the flagship g p of the Department’s p legal g workforce consisting of about half of Department p attorneys y These positions are highly sought after including as transfers from other DOJ components However the organization of the U S Attorneys component makes it the most difficult component about which to draw conclusions and the most difficult in which to make an impact There are 94 separate U S Attorneys’ Offices which correspond to federal judicial Districts each headed by a Presidentially-appointed U S Attorney The U S Attorneys who report directly to the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General have wide latitude to influence the work climate including the diversity climate in his her office Almost all of the attorneys in each office who all have the title Assistant U S Attorney are career appointees and the staff is divided into supervisory attorneys and non-supervisory attorneys However the organization g y component p makes it the most difficult of the U S Attorneys component about which to draw conclusions and the most difficult in which to make an impact p There are 94 separate U S Attorneys’ Offices which correspond to federal jjudicial Districts y a Presidentially-appointed y pp y The U S U Attorneys y who report p each headed by U S Attorney directlyy to the Attorneyy General and Deputy p y Attorneyy General have wide latitude to influence the work climate including g the diversity y climate in his her office Almost all of the attorneys y in each office who all have the title Assistant U S Attorney y are career appointees and the staff is divided into supervisory attorneys and non-supervisory attorneys The Executive Office for U S Attorneys EOUSA in Washington which houses the Director of the U S Attorney program and about 20 attorneys in administrative and policy roles advised that it has little leverage to impact the diversity climate in individual offices EOUSA’s Equal Employment Opportunity office and Evaluation and Review Staff play various oversight and monitoring roles The Executive Office for U S Attorneys y EOUSA in Washington g which houses the Director of the U S Attorneyy pprogram g and about 20 attorneys y in administrative and policy p y roles advised that it has little leverage g to impact p the diversity y climate in individual offices EOUSA’s Equal q Employment p y Opportunity pp office and Evaluation and Review Staff play various oversight and monitoring g roles r U S Trustees U S Trustees The offices of the U S Trustees which administers consumer and commercial bankruptcy cases on behalf of the federal government is the most atypical of the eleven components addressed in the study It is structured comparably to but even more decentralized than the U S Attorneys component and faces different challenges with respect to diversity climate The offices of the U S Trustees which administers consumer and commercial bankruptcy p y cases on behalf of the federal ggovernment is the most atypical yp p addressed in of the eleven components the study y It is structured comparably p y to but even more decentralized than the U S Attorneys component and faces different challenges with respect to diversity y climate A Presidentially-appointed Director housed in the Executive Office for U S Trustees EOUST in Washington D C oversees the program Each of 21 U S Trustees UST who are appointed by the Attorney General oversees a District which corresponds to a federal judicial Circuit or a sub-division of a Circuit Each UST supervises an average of about four Assistant U S Trustees AUSTs Generally each AUST oversees an office—which covers a part sometimes called a Division of the U S Trustee District—comprised of non-supervisory attorneys The offices are quite small—they average only a few attorneys and in many offices the AUST is the only attorney In turn the attorneys engage and oversee panel trustees non-government employees who are often but need not be lawyers who administer the cases The work climate is influenced mostly by the AUST to a lesser extent by the UST and to a minimal extent by the EOUST In A Presidentially-appointed Director housed in the Executive Office for U S Trustees EOUST in Washington D C oversees the program Each of 21 U S Trustees UST who are appointed by the Attorney General oversees a District which corresponds to a federal judicial Circuit or a sub-division of a Circuit Each UST supervises an average of about four Assistant U S Trustees AUSTs Generally each AUST oversees an office—which covers a part sometimes called a Division of the U S Trustee District—comprised of non-supervisory attorneys The offices are quite small—they average only a few attorneys and in many offices the AUST is the only g p y attorney In turn the attorneys engage and oversee panel trustees non-government employees y who administer the cases The work climate is influenced who are often but need not be lawyers mostly by the AUST to a lesser extent by the UST and to a minimal extent by the EOUST In ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 22 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 22 the past to the extent that the component has focused on diversity issues it has focused primarily on panel trustees who were not part of this study the ppast to the extent that the component p has focused on diversity issues it has focused primarily on panel trustees w who were not part of this study The nature of bankruptcy policy and law is that it is highly decentralized—laws are governed by state and Circuit and historically the U S Trustees program has been similarly decentralized in its management This decentralization is exacerbated by the fact that U S Trustees are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the Attorney General not the Director of the U S Trustees program However this organization is changing The current Administration has named a political appointee as Director of the program and has directed the U S Trustees to report to that individual for guidance on bankruptcy policy The General Counsel also housed in the EOUST is hopeful that this organizational shift—in addition to the current SES leadership—will give the Director more leverage to improve diversity in the field The nature of bankruptcy p y policy p y and law is that it is highly g y decentralized—laws are ggoverned by y state and Circuit and historicallyy the U S Trustees pprogram g has been similarly y decentralized in its management g pp This decentralization is exacerbated byy the fact that U S Trustees are appointed by y and serve at the ppleasure of the Attorney y General not the Director of the U S Trustees pprogram g g g g The current Administration has named a However this organization is changing ppolitical appointee pp g and has directed the U S Trustees to report p to that as Director of the pprogram individual for gguidance on bankruptcy p y ppolicy y The General Counsel also housed in the EOUST is hopeful p g that this organizational shift—in addition to the current SES leadership—will give the Director more leverage to improve diversity in the field The role of the Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management The role of the Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management The Department’s Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management OARM until recently known as the Office of Attorney Personnel Management plays a unique role in human resources and diversity management The office is housed administratively in the Justice Management Division although JMD does not control its budget and it currently reports directly to the Deputy Attorney General for management guidance on some issues The Department’s Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management OARM until recently known as the Office of Attorney Personnel Management plays a unique role in human resources and diversity management The office is housed administratively in the Justice Management Division although JMD does not control its budget and it currently reports directly to the Deputy Attorney General for management guidance on some issues OARM’s principal function is to administer the Attorney General’s Honors Program see section 3 2 7 1 on behalf of DOJ components The office also supports human resources administration in other ways such as processing background checks and suitability adjudications with the FBI for attorney candidates that components wish to hire administratively handling adverse personnel actions for attorneys and providing various forms of human resources management guidance such as interview training to components Between 1997 and 2001 OARM managed the pilot Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program LARP in an effort to apply some of the techniques that it had been using to recruit entry-level attorneys to recruit experienced attorneys again see section 3 2 7 1 for a discussion OARM’s principal function is to administer the Attorney General’s Honors Program see section 3 2 7 1 on behalf of DOJ components The office also supports human resources administration in other ways such as processing background checks and suitability adjudications with the FBI for attorney candidates that components wish to hire administratively handling adverse personnel actions for attorneys and providing various forms of human resources management guidance such as interview training to components Between 1997 and 2001 OARM managed the pilot Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program LARP in an effort to apply some of the techniques that it had been using to recruit entry-level attorneys to recruit experienced attorneys again see section 3 2 7 1 for a discussion We gathered a great deal of feedback on the role of OARM throughout the study from the office itself current and former JMD senior management and its component clients All constituents of the Honors Program cited its effectiveness for supporting entry-level attorney hiring as well as for improving diversity However opinions about the organization of OARM in principle and in practice were mixed We ggathered a ggreat deal of feedback on the role of OARM throughout g the study y from the office itself current and former JMD senior management g and its component p clients All constituents of the Honors Program g cited its effectiveness for supporting pp g entry-level y attorneyy hiringg as well as for improving p g diversity y However opinions about the organization of OARM in principle and in practice were mixed One point of contention is whether a special office devoted to human resources management for the attorney workforce is needed OARM and other proponents argue that because of the various exceptions to OPM personnel rules that DOJ enjoys for its attorney workforce the unique challenges in recruiting and developing this workforce its nature as highly professional and mobile and the central role that it plays in the Department the attorney workforce warrants a special office Others argue that there is no reason why these functions for the attorney workforce could not be handled by the Department’s conventional HR function housed under the JMD Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Human Resources and that the potential for economies of scale are lost by the current organization One point p p g of contention is whether a special office devoted to human resources management for the attorney y workforce is needed OARM and other pproponents p argue g that because of the various exceptions p p j y for its attorney y workforce the unique q to OPM personnel rules that DOJ enjoys challenges g in recruiting g and developing p g this workforce its nature as highly g y pprofessional and mobile and the central role that it pplays y in the Department p the attorney y workforce warrants a special p office Others argue g that there is no reason why y these functions for the attorney y workforce could not be handled byy the Department’s p conventional HR R function housed under the JMD Deputy p y Assistant Attorneyy General for Human Resources and that the potential for economies of scale are lost by the current organization ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 23 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 23 Separately from the role of an office like OARM in principle most participants in the study agreed that in practice the organization of OARM is flawed OARM managers say that the office cannot rely on steady sufficient funding because it is not part of mainstream JMD However OARM sees the exposure and attention that it gets from the Deputy Attorney General’s office as important to its success Separately p y from the role of an office like OARM in pprinciple p most pparticipants p in the study y agreed g that in ppractice the organization g g say y that the of OARM is flawed OARM managers office cannot relyy on steady y sufficient funding g because it is not ppart of mainstream JMD However OARM sees the exposure p and attention that it gets from the Deputy Attorney General’s office as important to its success The role of OARM is important for the study and our recommendations We sought in the study to determine whether OARM has contributed to the Department’s current positive standing with respect to diversity we believe that it has whether an office like OARM could be an important lever for improving diversity in the Department we believe that it could and if so how it should be structured We discuss the potential role of OARM throughout the sections on findings and recommendations The role of OARM is important p for the study y and our recommendations We sought g in the study y to determine whether OARM has contributed to the Department’s p current ppositive standing g with respect p to diversity y we believe that it has whether an office like OARM could be an important p lever for improving p g diversity y in the Department p we believe that it could and if so how it should be structured We discuss the potential role of OARM throughout the sections on findings and recommendations The roles of other JMD offices The roles of other JMD offices Other parts of the Justice Management Division impact the diversity of the attorney workforce and merit recognition in the study The Equal Employment Opportunity Staff EEOS is an active and important part of the Department It consults with OARM and the components especially the Litigating Divisions on EEO issues especially hiring and discrimination complaints It has also offered diversity training in the past EEOS managers believe that the office is currently underutilized partially due to communication barriers between itself and the components Other pparts of the Justice Management g Division impact p the diversityy of the attorneyy workforce and merit recognition g in the study y The Equal q Employment p y Opportunity pp y Stafff E EEOS is an active and important p p of the Department p It consults with OARM and the components p part especially p y the Litigating g g Divisions on EEO issues especially p y hiring g and discrimination complaints p It has also offered diversity y trainingg in the ppast EEOS managers g believe that the office is currently underutilized partially due to communication barriers between itself and the components The EEOS’s Special Emphasis Programs consist of a staff of ombudsmen who provide counseling for minority DOJ employees The Personnel Staff manages human resources for nonattorney staff in the Litigating Divisions and occasionally collaborates with OARM on human resources management best practices The Finance Staff maintains DOJ’s employment records including demographic information The EEOS’s Special p p Programs g consist of a staff of ombudsmen who pprovide Emphasis counselingg for minority y DOJ employees p y g human resources for nonThe Personnel Staff manages attorneyy staff in the Litigating g g Divisions and occasionallyy collaborates with OARM on human resources management g best ppractices The Finance Staff maintains DOJ’s employment records including demographic information Conclusion Conclusion Throughout our interviews with JMD OARM and the component front offices senior leaders managers and staff we focused on each party’s insight on attorney diversity and the leverage that it has to impact that diversity These findings informed the way that we posed questions to interview subjects and we took them into account as we formulated our overall findings for the study and recommendations g t our interviews with JMD OARM and the component p Throughout front offices senior leaders a age s and a d staff sta we focused ocused oon eac each party’s pa ty s insight s g t oon atto attorney ey diversity d ve s ty and a d the t e leverage eve age managers p that diversity y These findings g informed the way y that we pposed qquestions to that it has to impact j and we took them into accountt as we formulated our overall findings for the interview subjects study and recommendations More importantly these findings are relevant for how the Department addresses the issues that we uncovered in the study We believe that it will take extraordinarily strong leadership from the Attorney General’s and Deputy Attorney General’s Offices to implement change and in turn very strong leadership from the Assistant Attorneys General INS Commissioner individual U S Attorneys the U S Trustees Director and heads of the other components for any change to occur The Attorney General and Strategic Management Council will face significant challenges in leveraging the key managers within components—e g the Section Chiefs and District Counsel—to achieve the necessary results p y these findings g are relevant for how the Department p More importantly addresses the issues that y We believe that it will take extraordinarily y strong g leadership p from we uncovered in the study p y Attorney y General’s Offices to implement p change g and in turn the Attorneyy General’s and Deputy y strongg leadership p from the Assistant Attorneys y General INS Commissioner individual U S very y the U S Trustees Director and heads of the other components p for any y change g to Attorneys g Management g Council will face significant g challenges occur The Attorneyy General and Strategic eve ag g the t e key ey managers a age s w within t co components—e g p the Section Chiefs and District in leveraging y rresults Counsel—to achieve the necessary ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 24 3 2 Work climate ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 24 3 2 Work climate Work climate is defined as the culture of the environment in which people work It involves the way that people physically are situated the structures and processes that define the way they work and their interactions with each other Diversity climate refers to these cultural and environmental aspects as they relate to support and contravene diversity in the organization We use the terms “work climate” and “diversity climate” interchangeably throughout this report Work climate is defined as the culture of the environment in which ppeople p work It involves the way y that people p p pphysically y y are situated the structures and pprocesses that define the way y they work and their interactions with each other Diversityy climate refers to these cultural and environmental aspects p y relate to support pp and contravene diversity y in the organization g as they We use the terms “work climate” and “diversity climate” interchangeably throughout this report We gathered attorneys’ perceptions of the Department’s work climate through focus groups individual interviews and the survey We sought to ascertain attorneys’ perceptions as to the prevalent characteristics of the work climate as well as any differences in perceptions based on gender and race In a perfect climate for diversity there would be no differences in focus group interview and survey responses related to work climate based on gender or race We ggathered attorneys’ y pperceptions p of the Department’s p work climate through g focus ggroups p individual interviews and the survey y We sought g to ascertain attorneys’ y perceptions p p as to the pprevalent characteristics of the work climate as well as anyy differences in pperceptions p based on ggender and race In a pperfect climate for diversity y there would be no differences in focus group interview and survey responses related to work climate based on gender or race In many organizations however there are differences in perceptions of work climate based on gender and or race There are often subtle biases in the workplace related to gender and race which make actual experiences at work very different for people depending on their gender and race identity For example In many y organizations g however there are differences in pperceptions p of work climate based on ggender and or race There are often subtle biases in the workplace p related to ggender and race which make actual experiences p at work very different for people depending on their gender and race identity For example § § § § § § Members of the cultural majority group sometimes get more mentoring or mentoring from more powerful people than do members of cultural minority groups Members of the cultural majority group are sometimes more likely to be assigned to projects that have higher visibility at the top of the organization Members of the cultural majority group sometimes receive more helping behaviors such as co-workers volunteering to explain how to do something without being asked Members of the cultural majority group sometimes have control over more resources e g staff budget etc than minority group members of the same job grade Members of the cultural minority group sometimes perceive a less positive interpersonal climate such as less friendliness harsher tones of voice and fewer questions asked in interviews Members of the cultural majority group are sometimes more readily given stretch assignments such as being promoted to higher-profile jobs at lower levels of seniority or experience than their minority counterparts § § § § § § Members of the cultural majority j y group g p sometimes gget more mentoring g or mentoring from more ppowerful people p p than do members of cultural minorityy groups g p Members of the cultural majority j y group g p are sometimes more likely to be assigned to pprojects j that have higher g visibility y at the top p of the organization g Members of the cultural majority j y group g p sometimes receive more helping p g behaviors such as co-workers volunteering g to explain p how to do something g without being g asked Members of the cultural majority j y group g p sometimes have control over more resources e g staff budget etc than minority group members of the same job grade Members of the cultural minority y ggroup p sometimes pperceive a less ppositive interpersonal p climate such as less friendliness harsher tones of voice and fewer qquestions asked in interviews Members of the cultural majority j y group g p are sometimes more readilyy given g stretch assignments ass g e s such suc as being be g promoted p o o ed too higher-profile g e jobs at lower levels of seniority or experience than their minority counterparts Additionally gender and race may affect how people calibrate experiences good or bad For example women may look for different things in deciding whether or not a work culture values people Gender and race may create attitudes that people bring to the workplace which are independent of their actual experiences at work but may still affect how they respond when asked about work issues For example if an individual has experienced racism in the larger society then he she may anticipate it happening at work and misinterpret workplace experiences because of his her own mindset Additionally y gender g p p calibrate experiences p g good or bad For and race mayy affect how people example p women may y look for different things g in deciding g whether or not a work culture values ppeople p Gender and race may y create attitudes that ppeople p bring g to the workplace p which are independent p of their actual experiences p at work but may y still affect how they y respond p when asked about work issues For example p if an individual has experienced p racism in the larger g y then he she mayy anticipate p it happening at work and misinterpret workplace experiences society because of his her own mindset We designed the interview focus group and survey items that we posed to DOJ attorneys to gather information about various aspects of the climate related to these potential differences g p and survey y items that we pposed to DOJ attorneys y to We designed the interview focus ggroup gather information about various aspects of the climate related to these potential differences ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 25 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 25 3 2 1 Workforce identity profiles 3 2 1 Workforce identity profiles We began our analysis by examining DOJ employment records in order to develop portraits of the current attorney workforce subject to the data quality constraints discussed in section 2 2 2 We found that in general minorities and women are well-represented in the Department on the whole but are less well represented in management positions We began g our analysis y by y examining g DOJ employment p y records in order to develop p pportraits of the current attorneyy workforce subject j to the data qquality y constraints discussed in section 2 2 2 We found that in general g minorities and women are well-represented p in the Department on the whole but are less well represented in management positions Diversity of the DOJ political leadership Diversity of the DOJ political leadership Throughout this report we cite the importance of leadership from the top of DOJ as a necessary but not sufficient condition for the Department to achieve its diversity goals In this context it is worth noting that the current Administration has appointed a diverse attorney workforce to the top political leadership of DOJ The Deputy Attorney General and two of the six Assistant Attorneys General in charge of Litigating Divisions Antitrust and Civil Rights are minorities the AAG in charge of an additional Litigating Division Tax is a woman and the AAG heading the Office of Legal Policy is a minority Additionally several U S Attorneys including the U S Attorney for Washington D C are minorities and several are women g p we cite the importance p p from the top p of DOJ as a necessary y Throughout this report of leadership not sufficient condition for the Department p to achieve its diversityy ggoals In this context it but pp is worth notingg that the current Administration has appointed a diverse attorneyy workforce to the p p of DOJ The Deputy p y Attorney y General and two of the six Assistant topp political leadership y General in charge g of Litigating g g Divisions Antitrust g are minorities Attorneys and Civil Rights g of an additional Litigating g g Division Tax is a woman and the AAG heading g the AAG in charge g Policy y is a minority y Additionally y several U S Attorneys including the U S the Office of Legal Attorney for Washington D C are minorities and several are women Diversity of the overall attorney workforce Diversity of the overall attorney workforce As of December 31 2001 the Department workforce included about 9 200 attorneys 54% of whom were in the U S Attorneys’ Offices 30% in the Litigating Divisions and 16% in the other components 9 Overall the attorney workforce is about 15% minority and 38% female compared with about 12% minority and 30% female in the U S attorney labor force10 As of December 31 2001 the Department workforce included about 9 200 attorneys 54% of whom were in the U S Attorneys’ Offices 30% in the Litigating Divisions and 16% in the other components 9 Overall the attorney workforce is about 15% minority and 38% female compared with about 12% minority and 30% female in the U S attorney labor force10 Table 3 2 1 1 U S attorney labor pool from census data and DOJ attorney labor force Table 3 2 1 1 U S attorney labor pool from census data and DOJ attorney labor force Workforce All attorneys in U S DOJ attorneys Workforce All attorneys in U S DOJ attorneys % female 30% 38% % minority 12% 15% % female 30% 38% % minority 12% 15% Throughout this report when we refer to the representativeness or over-representativeness or under-representativeness of a particular demographic group in a particular segment of the Department we define those terms as the percentage of attorneys in that segment which are of that group compared to the percentage of attorneys in the Department as a whole which are of that group Note however that based on our recommended definition of DOJ’s attorney workforce diversity goals discussed in section 2 1 the Department should be cognizant of the percentage of the attorneys in each segment of each demographic group compared to the percentage of attorneys in the national attorney workforce as a whole which are of that group g p when we refer to the representativeness p over-representativeness p Throughout this report or or p of a pparticular demographic g p ggroupp in a pparticular segment g of the under-representativeness p we define those terms as the ppercentage g off attorneys y in that segment g Department which are off g p compared p p g off attorneys y in the Department p that group to the percentage as a whole which are of g p Note however that based on our recommended definition of DOJ’s attorney y that group y ggoals discussed in section 2 1 tthe Department p should be cognizant g of the workforce diversity p g of the attorneys y in each segment g of each demographic g p ggroup p compared p to the percentage percentage of attorneys in the national attorney workforce as a whole which are of that group The racial and gender diversity of the Department’s attorney workforce varies widely by component With the exception of Civil Rights the Litigating Divisions are less diverse with The racial and ggender diversity y of the Department’s p r attorneyy workforce varies widely y by y component With the exception of Civil Rights the Litigating Divisions are less diverse with 9 These breakdowns are based only on the eleven components in the study which together employ approximately 95% of DOJ attorneys not including FBI agents who are attorneys Throughout this report when we refer to breakdowns of the attorney workforce we refer exclusively to the workforce of the eleven components 10 The source of these figures is self-identified employment classifications from the 2000 U S Census Data includes attorneys in all fields—all levels of government non-profit and private—in the U S 9 These breakdowns are based only on the eleven components in the study which together employ approximately 95% of DOJ attorneys not including FBI agents who are attorneys Throughout this report when we refer to breakdowns of the attorney workforce we refer exclusively to the workforce of the eleven components 10 The source of these figures is self-identified employment classifications from the 2000 U S Census Data includes attorneys in all fields—all levels of government non-profit and private—in the U S ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 26 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 26 respect to race and about as diverse with respect to gender as the rest of the Department The U S Attorneys’ Offices also mirror the rest of the Department which is not surprising since they constitute over half of the Department’s attorneys Figures B 1 and B 2 in appendix B illustrate the percentage of the attorney workforce which is minority and female respectively in each of the eleven components included in the study respect p to race and about as diverse with respect p to ggender as the rest of the Department p The U S Attorneys’ y Offices also mirror the rest of the Department p which is not surprising p g since they constitute over half of the Department’s p attorneys y Figures g B 1 and B 2 in appendix pp B illustrate the percentage p g of the attorney y workforce which is minority and female respectively in each of the eleven components included in the study An important issue for the Department is whether it should consider its objective to be that each component meet the definition of diversity that we proposed in section 2 1 or whether natural differences in representation across components should be allowed to comprise a Department which is sufficiently diverse in the aggregate Many participants in the study—from managers from the Assistant Chief to Assistant Attorney General level as well as external constituents such as the American Bar Association—expressed the belief that patterns of intellectual and professional interest in certain practices of the law have limited and will continue to limit the potential of those practices to be as diverse with respect to gender race and ethnicity as the legal labor pool as a whole In particular this claim was cited for antitrust tax bankruptcy and environmental law An important p issue for the Department p is whether it should consider its objective j to be that each component p t meet the definition of diversity y that we pproposed p in section 2 1 or whether natural differences in representation p across components p should be allowed to comprise p a Department p which is sufficientlyy diverse in the aggregate gg g Many y pparticipants p in the study—from y g managers from the Assistant Chief to Assistant Attorney y General level as well as external constituents such as the American Bar Association—expressed p the belief that ppatterns of intellectual and pprofessional interest in certain practices p of the law have limited and will continue to limit the ppotential of those practices p p to gender g race and ethnicity y as the legal to be as diverse with respect labor ppool as a whole In particular this claim was cited for antitrust tax bankruptcy and environmental law Evaluating these claims was beyond the scope of this study 11 However in order for these reasons to explain different demographic breakdowns in different fields several conditions would have to be met Evaluatingg these claims was beyond y the scope p of this study y 11 However in order for these reasons to explain p different demographic breakdowns in different fields several conditions would have to be met § § § § Each attorney and prospective attorney in the market is sufficiently exposed to each practice area in the law to make an informed judgment about what areas he she is interested in 12 The Department conducts sufficient outreach in hiring to reach all attorneys who might be interested in each practice field This includes a conscientious definition of the skill set which is truly required to perform the duties in each component Each DOJ component practices equality in hiring promotion and other areas which will influence the composition of its workforce Each attorney and candidate for employment perceives that each component practices equality in the human resources management areas which will influence his her opportunities for success As we discuss throughout the study these conditions are not sufficiently met to be able to legitimately ascribe current shortfalls in diversity at DOJ strictly to market forces 11 With some exceptions such as civil rights or immigration law we cannot conceive of any reason a priori why certain gender racial or ethnic groups would be less inclined to practice certain areas of the law especially those repeatedly cited as lacking a diverse labor pool than others 12 An example of an explanation for a lack of diversity offered in the study was that students who went to law school in the interior West of the U S are more likely to be surrounded by public lands issues and are thus more likely to be interested in this type of law which a significant segment of the Environment and Natural Resources Section practices Because the interior West has different a demographic makeup than the country as a whole those patterns are likely to be reflected in the market of attorneys who wish to practice this area While this reasoning is plausible it is an example of our suggestion that differing levels of exposure to this type of law—rather than inherently different levels of intellectual disposition—among certain demographic groups is what leads to this result In our recommendations section we suggest ways that the Department can assist to increase exposure of certain more obscure practice areas § § § § Each attorney y and pprospective p attorney y in the market is sufficientlyy exposed p to each ppractice area in the law to make an informed judgment about what areas he she is interested in 12 The Department p conducts sufficient outreach in hiringg to reach all attorneys y who might g be interested in each ppractice field This includes a conscientious definition of to perform the duties in each component the skill set which is trulyy required q p p Each DOJ component p ppractices equality q y in hiring promotion and other areas which of its workforce will influence the composition p Each attorney y and candidate for employment p y t pperceives that each component p ppractices equality q y in the human resources management areas which will influence his her opportunities for success As we discuss throughout the study g y these conditions are not sufficiently y met to be able to legitimately ascribe current shortfalls in diversity at DOJ strictly to market forces 11 With some exceptions p such as civil rights g or immigration g law we cannot conceive of any y reason a p priori whyy certain gender g racial or ethnic groups g p would be less inclined to practice p certain areas of the law especially y those repeatedly cited as lacking a diverse labor pool than others 12 An example p of an explanation p for a lack of diversity y offered in the study y was that students who went to law school in the interior West of the U S are more likely y to be surrounded by y ppublic lands issues and are thus more likely y to be interested in this type yp of law which h a significant g t segment g of the Environment and Natural Resources Section ppractices Because the interior West has different a demographic g p makeup p than the country y as a whole those ppatterns are likelyy to be reflected in the market of attorneys y who wish to practice p this area While this reasoning is pplausible it is an example p of our suggestion gg that differing g levels of exposure p yp of law—rather than to this type inherently y different levels of intellectual disposition—among p g certain r demographic g p groups g p is what leads to this result In our recommendations section we suggest ways that the Department can assist to increase exposure of certain more obscure practice areas ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 27 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 27 Workforce diversity by location Workforce diversity by location By definition all U S Attorneys’ Offices are in the field there is also a District in Washington D C Of the other components about 31% of attorneys are in the field the Executive Office for Immigration Review is located in Falls Church VA which we consider to be Washington D C for the purpose of this analysis About 7% of attorneys in the Litigating Divisions about half in EOIR13 a majority in the Bureau of Prisons most of the INS and virtually all of U S Trustees are located in the field By definition all U S Attorneys’ Offices are in the field there is also a District in Washington D C Of the other components about 31% of attorneys are in the field the Executive Office for Immigration Review is located in Falls Church VA which we consider to be Washington D C for the purpose of this analysis About 7% of attorneys in the Litigating Divisions about half in EOIR13 a majority in the Bureau of Prisons most of the INS and virtually all of U S Trustees are located in the field The following figure displays the racial and gender diversity of headquarters and field attorneys not including U S Attorneys’ Offices The following figure displays the racial and gender diversity of headquarters and field attorneys not including U S Attorneys’ Offices Table 3 2 1 2 Racial and gender diversity of headquarters and field attorneys not including U S Attorneys’ Offices Table 3 2 1 2 Racial and gender diversity of headquarters and field attorneys not including U S Attorneys’ Offices Group Male Female Field 58% 42% Group Male Female 82% 18% White Minority Headquarters 59% 41% White Minority 86% 14% Department-wide these differences are minimal However in the Litigating Divisions that is not the case although only a small portion of their attorneys are in the field and virtually none in the Civil Rights and Criminal Divisions only about 7% of field Litigating Division attorneys are minorities 13 Most EOIR attorneys in the field are immigration judges who were not included in this study Headquarters 59% 41% 86% 14% Field 58% 42% 82% 18% Department-wide these differences are minimal However in the Litigating Divisions that is not the case although only a small portion of their attorneys are in the field and virtually none in the Civil Rights and Criminal Divisions only about 7% of field Litigating Division attorneys are minorities 13 Most EOIR attorneys in the field are immigration judges who were not included in this study ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 28 3 2 2 Culture and acculturation The culture and acculturation aspect of the Interactional Model deals with the organizational culture and how individuals’ cultures interact with it Culture ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 28 3 2 2 Culture and acculturation The culture and acculturation aspect p of the Interactional Model deals with the organizational culture and how individuals’ cultures interact with it Culture Organizational culture—with respect both to areas explicitly related to race and gender identity and to areas not explicitly identify-specific—is a key force that will have an impact on an organization’s ability to sustain a diverse workforce Culture includes such factors as norms of behavior values beliefs and shared meanings and traditions among employees Organizational g culture—with respect p both to areas explicitly p y related to race and ggender identity and to areas not explicitly p y identify-specific—is y p a key y force that will have an impact p on an organization’s g ability y to sustain a diverse workforce Culture includes such factors as norms of behavior values beliefs and shared meanings and traditions among employees We measured DOJ’s culture to ascertain both whether it contains elements that are expressly adverse to diversity and whether differences in the ways that different racial or gender groups perceive the culture might be impacting diversity Respondents to the survey rated the Department culture on a series of norms that have been found in previous theory and research to be closely related to diversity For example a climate that tends to quash dissenting opinions can be especially difficult for members of cultural minority groups because their difference makes them more likely to have a dissenting view The following graph compares responses for different identity groups on these survey items In these items respondents are asked to state to what extent they agree that each item characterizes the DOJ culture We measured DOJ’s culture to ascertain both whether it contains elements that are expressly p y adverse to diversity y and whether differences in the ways y that different racial or ggender groups pperceive the culture might g be impacting p g diversity y Respondents p to the survey y rated the Department p culture on a series of norms that have been found in pprevious theory y and research to be closely y related to diversity y For example p a climate that tends to qquash dissenting g opinions p can be especially p y difficult for members of cultural minorityy groups g p because their difference makes them more likelyy to have a dissentingg view The followingg graph g p compares p responses p for different identityy groups g p on these surveyy items In these items respondents p are asked to state to what extent they agree that each item characterizes the DOJ culture ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Figure 3 2 2 1 Organizational culture survey responses by race PAGE 29 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE JUNE 14 2002 Figure 3 2 2 1 Organizational culture survey responses by race Welcomes and values new ideas Welcomes and values new ideas Tolerates mistakes as vehicles to learn Item Tolerates mistakes as vehicles to learn Item KPMG CONSULTING Substance is rewarded over style Substance is rewarded over style Dissent is welcomed Dissent is welcomed People are valued People are valued 0% 10% 20% People are valued 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Substance is Tolerates mistakes Dissent is welcomed rewarded over style as vehicles to learn Minorities 56% 33% Whites 70% 50% 90% 0% 100% Welcomes and values new ideas 10% People are valued 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Substance is Tolerates mistakes Dissent iss welcomed rewarded d over style as vehicles to learn 90% Welcomes and values new ideas 48% 57% 48% Minorities 56% 33% 48% 57% 48% 67% 67% 65% Whites 70% 50% 67% Score S 67% 65% Score 100% PAGE 29 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 30 Welcomes and values new ideas Welcomes and values new w ideas Tolerates mistakes as vehicles to learn Tolerates mistakes as vehicles to learn Substance is rewarded over style Dissent is welcomed People are valued People are valued 10% 20% 30% JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 30 Substance is rewarded overr style style Dissent is welcomed 0% KPMG CONSULTING Figure 3 2 2 2 Organizational culture survey responses by gender Item Item Figure 3 2 2 2 Organizational culture survey responses by gender ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 40% People are valued Dissent is welcomed Women 56% 39% Men 76% 53% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 0% Substance is Tolerates mistakes as Welcomes and values rewarded over style vehicles to learn new ideas 10% 20% 30% Dissent is s welcomed 56% 60% 55% Women 56% 39% 68% 70% 67% Men 76% 53% Score 40% People are valued 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Substance is Tolerates mistakes as Welcomes and values rewarded vehicles to learn new ideas d over style 56% 60% 55% 68% 70% 67% Score ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 31 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 31 The data in figures 3 2 2 1 and 3 2 2 2 show that views on these general culture items are statistically significantly different14 depending on the DOJ member’s race and gender A pattern emerges here that is prevalent throughout the assessment—namely that women in DOJ are less likely than men to hold favorable views on the measures of work climate and that racial minorities as a group are less likely than whites to hold favorable views on measures of work climate g The data in figures 3 2 2 1 and 3 2 2 2 show that views on these ggeneral culture items are y significantly g y different14 depending p g on the DOJ member’s race and ggender A ppattern statistically emerges g here that is pprevalent throughout g the assessment—namely y that women in DOJ are less likelyy than men to hold favorable views on the measures of work climate and that racial minorities as a group are less likely than whites to hold favorable views on measures of work climate It is especially noteworthy that a large majority of both women and minorities answered unfavorably about the item asking about tolerance of dissent In interviews managers suggested that the Department is more tolerant of criticism of the institution from employees than other organizations are It is especially p y noteworthy y that a large g majority j y of both women and minorities answered unfavorably y about the item asking g about tolerance of dissent In interviews managers g suggested gg that the Department p is more tolerant of criticism of the institution from employees than other organizations are In focus groups and individual interviews we also asked attorneys to describe the outstanding features of the work culture in their own words Following are the eight pervasive themes—cited across gender racial ethnic and component groups—that were reported15 In focus ggroups p and individual interviews we also asked attorneys y to describe the outstanding g features of the work culture in their own words Followingg are the eight g pervasive themes—cited across gender racial ethnic and component groups—that were reported d 115 § § § § § § § § family-friendly environment members have high autonomy to perform jobs highly collegial environment i e people support and help each other challenging work accessibility of mentoring high pressure and heavy workload gaps in diversity i e less-than-ideal representation of women and minorities in a variety of areas and presence of cliques and favoritism e g bias in favor of whites bias in favor of graduates of Ivy League law schools and bias in favor of other groups that are not necessarily based on race or gender identity § § § § § § § § family-friendly y y environment members have high g autonomy y to pperform jjobs highly g y collegial g environment i e people support and help each other challenging g g work accessibilityy of mentoring g high g ppressure and heavy y workload ggaps p in diversityy i e less-than-ideal representation of women and minorities in a varietyy of areas and ppresence of cliques q and favoritism e g g bias in favor of whites bias in favor of ggraduates of Ivy y League g law schools and bias in favor of other groups that are not necessarily based on race or gender identity There are two striking findings about this list five of the themes characterize the culture in unequivocally positive terms A sixth high pressure and heavy workload could be positive although the way that participants expressed it was in negative terms It is clear that DOJ is generally viewed as a good place to work by people of all gender and racial ethnic backgrounds There are two strikingg findings g about this list five of the themes characterize the culture in unequivocally q y ppositive terms A sixth high g pressure p and heavy y workload could be ppositive although g the wayy that participants p p p it was in negative g terms It is clear that DOJ is expressed generally viewed as a good place to work by people of all gender and racial ethnic backgrounds Second the two themes that are unfavorable characterizations deal directly with diversity issues Although this study focused on diversity this particular question asked only about the general work culture The fact that racial and or gender identity was cited by some participants as a factor in clique membership and that minorities were somewhat more likely than whites to cite this aspect of the culture establish that it is related to diversity Second the two themes that are unfavorable characterizations deal directly y with diversity y issues Although g this studyy focused on diversity y this particular p q question asked onlyy about the ggeneral work culture The fact that racial and or gender g y some pparticipants p identityy was cited by as a factor in clique q membership p and that minorities were somewhat more likely than whites to cite this aspect of the culture establish that it is related to diversity We also studied those factors from which culture derives In the Department’s case the nature of the work and the workforce are responsible for a good deal of the culture Although the eight We also studied those factors from which culture derives In the Department’s p case the nature of the work and the workforce are responsible for a good deal of the culture Although the eight 14 Throughout the report when we say “significant ” we mean that the effect is statistically significant where applicable 15 The prevalence of these themes derives from two criteria 1 they were mentioned in at least 50 percent of the DOJ components studied and 2 they were mentioned by a preponderance of participants from three or more of the five gender race strata white men white women African-Americans Hispanics and other minorities Thus they are pervasive across components genders and races 14 Throughout g t tthe he report wh w when en we say “significant ” we mean thatt tthe he effe effect f ctt iiss statistically significant w where applicable pp where 15 The pprevalence of these themes derives from two criteria 1 they y were mentioned in at least 50 ppercent of participants of the DOJ components p studied and 2 theyy were mentioned byy a preponderance p p p p from three or more of the five gender race g strata white men white women African-Americans Hispanics and other minorities Thus they are pervasive across components genders and races ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 32 factors mentioned above are present across the Department nuances within them and other aspects of the culture vary a good deal by component and location As in any organization the leadership of each office plays an important role in setting the tone as well The Section Chief or equivalent in the Litigating Divisions Regional Counsel or District Counsel in the INS U S Trustee or Assistant U S Trustee U S Attorney and local office head in EOIR and BOP are those managers at the level within their respective organization who are at the most critical position to impact culture ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING Acculturation Acculturation deals with the organization’s acceptance of cultural differences among employees One survey question dealt with this topic The following figure shows the percentage of each group that expressed agreement with the statement “Employees feel free to express differences that may be due to different cultural backgrounds” Acculturation deals with the organization’s g p of cultural differences among g employees p y acceptance One surveyy question q p The followingg figure g p g of each dealt with this topic shows the percentage ggroup p that expressed p g agreement with the statement “Employees feel free to express differences that may be due to different cultural backgrounds” b Figure 3 2 2 3 Acculturation survey responses Figure 3 2 2 3 Acculturation survey responses Q15 Employees feel free to express differences that may be due to different cultural backgrounds Q15 Employees feel free to express differences that may be due to different cultural backgrounds Q15 Employe Employees y es feel free to express differences that may y be due to different different cultural backgrounds Q15 Emp Employees m loy oyees feel f free r tto oe express xpres r s differences diff ffere r nces c s that that a may be due to ma o di fferentt cul ff tural backgr k ounds may different cultural backgrounds Minorities Women Minorities s Women Whites Men Whites Men 20% PAGE 32 factors mentioned above are ppresent across the Department p nuances within them and other aspects p of the culture vary y a ggood deal by y component mp and location As in any y organization g the leadershipp of each office pplays y an important p role in settingg the tone as well The Section Chief or equivalent q in the Litigating g g Divisions Regional g Counsel or District Counsel in the INS U S Trustee or Assistant U S Trustee U S Attorney y and local office head in EOIR and BOP are those managers g at the level within their respective organization who are at the most critical position to impact culture Acculturation 0% JUNE 14 2002 40% 60% 80% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 0% 20% 40% 60% There was a significant difference between men’s and women’s as well as whites’ and minorities’ perceptions of their freedom to express differences that may be due to cultural backgrounds There was a significant g difference between men’s and women’s as well as whites’ and minorities’ perceptions p of their freedom to express differences that may be due to cultural backgrounds In addition we tested for differences related to combinations of gender and race identity on this survey question and found the following pattern in percent favorable response In addition we tested for differences related to combinations of ggender and race identity on this survey question and found the following pattern in percent favorable response § § § § white men 83% white women 73% minority men 56% and minority women 42% Note that the proportion of favorable response declines continually as the identity profile of the group is less similar to white male the majority culture group and in particular minority women are the only group in which a majority of attorneys give an unfavorable response § white men 83% § white women 73% y men 56% and § minority § minority women 42% p of favorable response p declines continually y as the identity y pprofile of the Note that the pproportion g p is less similar to white male the t majority j y culture group g p and in pparticular minority y group women are the only group in which a majority of attorneys give an unfavorable response 80% ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 33 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 33 These results give an important insight into how culture and diversity relate to one another The more different a person is from the traditional group of power in an organization the more likely that person is to experience cultural distance or separation from the dominant norms and ways of operating in that organization White men having essentially created the culture of the organization are most comfortable working in it The amount of discomfort experienced by people of other backgrounds will be greater when there is strong pressure for newcomers to conform assimilate to the existing dominant culture norms These results ggive an important p insight g into how culture and diversityy relate to one another The more different a pperson is from the traditional ggroup p of ppower in an organization g the more likely y that pperson is to experience p cultural distance orr separation p from the dominant norms and ways of operating p g in that organization g y created the culture of the White men havingg essentially organization g are most comfortable workingg in it The amount of discomfort experienced p by y ppeople p of other backgrounds g will be greater g when there is strong pressure for newcomers to conform assimilate to the existing dominant culture norms The fact that attorneys who are both female and members of racial minority groups have the least favorable reported experience is generally true throughout this study This outcome includes not just results based on individual perceptions but also on organizational outcomes such as upward mobility and compensation levels The fact that attorneys y who are both female and members of racial minority y ggroups p have the least favorable reported p experience p is ggenerally y true throughout g this study y This outcome includes not jjust results based on individual perceptions p but also on organizational outcomes such as upward mobility and compensation levels To illustrate how strong this result is consider that across 49 survey items whose results can be reasonably compared across race gender groups minority women were the least likely of the four race gender groups white men white women minority men minority women to give a favorable response on 77% of the measures and second least likely to give a favorable response on another 19% of items Moreover the average difference in favorable response scores across all survey items for minority women compared to white men was 20 percentage points To illustrate how strongg this result is consider that across 49 surveyy items whose results can be reasonablyy compared p across race gender g ggroups p minority y women were the least likely y of the four race gender g ggroups p white men white women minorityy men minority y women to ggive a favorable response p on 77% of the measures and second least likelyy to give g a favorable response p on another 19% of items Moreover the average g difference in favorable response p scores a across all survey items for minority women compared to white men was 20 percentage points ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 34 3 2 3 Structural integration Structural integration refers to the presence of women and minorities in the formal power and leadership hierarchies of the Department In the Litigating Divisions we found that the Section Chiefs or Branch Directors are the primary levers for influencing the structural integration of the Department They are ultimately most accountable for outcomes in their Section They have significant authority for recruitment hiring promotion job assignment reward allocation and other outcomes They also establish the degree to which formal participation in these processes is distributed to others Workforce diversity by grade A natural analysis of the structural integration of the attorney workforce is a stratification by grade The most visible—and commonly cited throughout the study—diversity issue with respect to grade is the lack of women and especially minorities in upper management ranks We analyzed the data two different ways exploring the likelihood that an attorney of certain demographic characteristics would be at each level and the percentage of attorneys at each level who are of each demographic These presentations are essentially equivalent they simply provide two different approaches to the question of representation in each level General Schedule attorneys ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 34 3 2 3 Structural integration Structural integration g refers to the ppresence of women and minorities in the formal ppower and leadershipp hierarchies of the Department p In the Litigating g g Divisions we found that the Section Chiefs or Branch Directors are the pprimaryy levers for influencingg the structural integration g of the Department p They y are ultimately y most accountable for outcomes in their Section They y have significant g authority y for recruitment hiring g ppromotion job j assignment g reward allocation and other outcomes Theyy also establish the degree to which formal participation in these processes is distributed to others Workforce diversity by grade A natural analysis y of the structural integration g of the attorney y workforce is a stratification by ggrade The most visible—and commonly y cited throughout g the study—diversity y y issue with respect p to ggrade is the lack of women and especially p y minorities in upper pp management g ranks We analyzed y the data two different ways y exploring p g the likelihood that an attorney y of certain demographic g p characteristics would be at each level and the ppercentage g of attorneys y at each level who are of each demographic g p These ppresentations are essentially y equivalent q they simply provide two different approaches to the question of representation in each level General Schedule attorneys We define upper management as the Senior Executive Service SES because it or its equivalent in other pay plans in other departments is the highest executive level in the federal government besides Presidential appointee levels Moreover the appointment process for SES for career appointments is thorough and specialized—DOJ is not exempt from this process as it is for sub-SES attorney positions—and the status associated with the level is significant Most SES attorneys in the Department are in the Litigating Divisions where virtually all Deputy Assistant Attorneys General and Section Chiefs and some Deputy Section Chiefs hold the SES rank The other components which use the GS pay plan—Bureau of Prisons INS U S Trustees and Executive Office for Immigration Review—have a few SES attorneys in their front offices Virtually no SES attorneys reside in the field in DOJ We define upper pp management g as the Senior Executive Service S SES because it or its equivalent q y pplans in other departments p is the highest g in other ppay executive level in the federal ggovernment besides Presidential appointee pp levels Moreover the appointment pp pprocess for SES for career appointments pp is thorough g and specialized—DOJ p is not exempt p from this pprocess as it is for sub-SES attorney positions—and the status associated with the level is significant Most SES attorneys in the Department are in the Litigating Divisions where virtually all Deputy Assistant Attorneys General and Section Chiefs and some Deputy Section Chiefs hold the SES rank The other components which use the GS pay plan—Bureau of Prisons INS U S Trustees and Executive Office for Immigration Review—have a few SES attorneys in their front offices Virtually no SES attorneys reside in the field in DOJ Men are significantly more likely than women 1 9% of the male attorney workforce versus 1 3% of females and whites are twice as likely as minorities 1 8% versus 0 9% to be in SES jobs Both of these differences are statistically significant 16 Hispanics 0 75% and Native Americans none are least likely to be in the SES There are also significant effects across race-gender interaction groups Two percent of white males 1 45% of white females 1 25% of minority males and 0 57% of minority females are in SES positions Men are significantly more likely than women 1 9% of the male attorney workforce versus 1 3% of females and whites are twice as likely as minorities 1 8% versus 0 9% to be in SES jobs Both of these differences are statistically significant 16 Hispanics 0 75% and Native Americans none are least likely to be in the SES There are also significant effects across race-gender interaction groups Two percent of white males 1 45% of white females 1 25% of minority males and 0 57% of minority females are in SES positions Among Assistant U S Attorneys men are also significantly more likely than women 21% of male AUSAs are supervisors compared to 16% of female AUSAs who are supervisors and whites are significantly more likely than minorities 20% versus 14% to be in supervisory Among Assistant U S Attorneys men are also significantly more likely than women 21% of male AUSAs are supervisors compared to 16% of female AUSAs who are supervisors and whites are significantly more likely than minorities 20% versus 14% to be in supervisory 16 Technically this workforce is a population not a sample so these types of statistical tests are not suitable However we can conceptualize the current workforce as a realization of larger patterns for example over time or for those on which we do not have data such that these tests are of some value 16 Technically this workforce is a population not a sample so these types of statistical tests are not suitable However we can conceptualize the current workforce as a realization of larger patterns for example over time or for those on which we do not have data such that these tests are of some value ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 35 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 35 grades Hispanics 12% Asian Americans 13% and minority women 17% are least likely to be supervisory AUSAs grades Hispanics 12% Asian Americans 13% and minority women 17% are least likely to be supervisory AUSAs The following graphs display the percentage of the attorney workforce within each grade that is a racial and or ethnic minority First the following figures display the racial and gender breakdown of attorneys in components which use the General Schedule17 The following graphs display the percentage of the attorney workforce within each grade that is a racial and or ethnic minority First the following figures display the racial and gender breakdown of attorneys in components which use the General Schedule17 17 Noncareer SES positions are excluded 17 Noncareer SES positions are excluded ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE JUNE 14 2002 KPMG CONSULTING ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE PAGE 36 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 50% 40% 60% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% PAGE 36 Figure 3 2 3 1 Percentage of attorneys at each grade level who are minority and white Percent of attorneys Percent of attorneys Figure 3 2 3 1 Percentage of attorneys at each grade level who are minority and white JUNE 14 2002 KPMG CONSULTING 0% GS-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14 GS-15 SL ES GS-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14 GS-15 SL Minority 45% 26% 24% 20% 12% 21% 7% Minority 45% 26% 24% 20% 12% 21% 7% White 55% 74% 76% 80% 88% 79% 93% White 55% 74% 76% 80% 88% 79% 93% Grade Grade ES ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE JUNE 14 2002 KPMG CONSULTING ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE PAGE 37 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% PAGE 37 Figure 3 2 3 2 Percentage of attorneys at each grade level who are female and male 90% Percent of attorneys Percent of attorneys Figure 3 2 3 2 Percentage of attorneys at each grade level who are female and male JUNE 14 2002 KPMG CONSULTING 0% GS-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14 GS-15 SL ES GS-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14 GS-15 SL ES Female 69% 67% 48% 49% 39% 21% 31% Female 69% 67% 48% 49% 39% 21% 31% Male 31% 33% 52% 51% 61% 79% 69% Male 31% 33% 52% 51% 61% 79% 69% Grade Grade ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 38 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 38 Additional detail about components is provided in figures B 3 B 4 B 5 and B 6 in appendix B Additional detail about components is provided in figures B 3 B 4 B 5 and B 6 in appendix B In general especially in the Litigating Divisions the pattern is one of declining racial diversity as rank increases The gender diversity declines as rank increases but at less than the rate at which racial ethnic diversity declines In general is one of declining g especially p y in the Litigating g g Divisions the pattern p g racial diversity as rank increases The ggender diversity declines as rank increases but at less than the rate at which racial ethnic diversity declines Note the particularly high spikes in female and minority representation in grades 11 and 12 Attorneys in these grades fall into one category recent Attorney General’s Honors Program hires As we discuss in section 3 2 7 1 this population is over-representative of minorities and women compared to their representation in law school due to significant effort on the part of the Department to increase the diversity of the pool Thus the Department should be commended for hiring a very diverse corps of Honors Program attorneys The key for this diversity to be maintained is that this pool of attorneys is promoted and retained in DOJ Note the particularly in female and minorityy representation p y high g spikes p p in ggrades 11 and 12 Attorneys y in these ggrades fall into one category g y recent Attorney y General’s Honors Program g es Ass we discuss d scuss in section sect o 3 2 7 1 3 7 this t s population popu at o iss over-representative ove ep ese tat ve oof minorities o t es aand hires p to their representation p in law school due to significant g effort on the part of women compared p to increase the diversity y off the ppool Thus the Department p should be the Department g a veryy diverse corps p of Honors Program g attorneys y The keyy for this commended for hiring diversity to be maintained is that this pool of attorneys is promoted and retained in DOJ U S Attorneys’ Offices U S Attorneys’ Offices Attorneys in U S Attorneys’ Offices are on the Administratively Determined AD pay plan Besides the distinction between supervisory grades 1-19 and non-supervisory grades 20-29 the numeric grade in AD is less significant than in the GS case Additionally the supervisory grades do not compare directly with the SES rank in the other components but they represent the only grade distinction available besides U S Attorneys themselves who are excluded from this study because they are political appointees Therefore we present the population simply divided into the supervisory and non-supervisory categories Attorneys in U S Attorneys’ Offices are on the Administratively Determined AD pay plan Besides the distinction between supervisory grades 1-19 and non-supervisory grades 20-29 the numeric grade in AD is less significant than in the GS case Additionally the supervisory grades do not compare directly with the SES rank in the other components but they represent the only grade distinction available besides U S Attorneys themselves who are excluded from this study because they are political appointees Therefore we present the population simply divided into the supervisory and non-supervisory categories Men are statistically significantly more likely to be in supervisory jobs than are women 21% of male Assistant U S Attorneys are supervisors compared with 16% of female AUSAs White AUSAs 20% are also more likely to be supervisors than minorities 14% Among racial and ethnic minority groups Native American 19% and black 15% AUSAs are more likely to be supervisors than Hispanics 12% or Asians 12% Additionally there are statistically significant differences in representation in the supervisory ranks across the four gender and race ethnicity interaction groups 22% of white male AUSAs are supervisors compared with 18% of white female AUSAs 17% of minority male AUSAs and 12% of minority female AUSAs Men are statistically significantly more likely to be in supervisory jobs than are women 21% of male Assistant U S Attorneys are supervisors compared with 16% of female AUSAs White AUSAs 20% are also more likely to be supervisors than minorities 14% Among racial and ethnic minority groups Native American 19% and black 15% AUSAs are more likely to be supervisors than Hispanics 12% or Asians 12% Additionally there are statistically significant differences in representation in the supervisory ranks across the four gender and race ethnicity interaction groups 22% of white male AUSAs are supervisors compared with 18% of white female AUSAs 17% of minority male AUSAs and 12% of minority female AUSAs The following table shows the percentage of women and minorities within each rank in the U S Attorneys’ Offices18 The following table shows the percentage of women and minorities within each rank in the U S Attorneys’ Offices18 Table 3 2 3 1 Percent of each rank which are women and minorities U S Attorneys’ Offices Table 3 2 3 1 Percent of each rank which are women and minorities U S Attorneys’ Offices Rank Non-supervisory AD-20—AD-29 Supervisory AD-1—AD-19 Rank Non-supervisory AD-20—AD-29 Supervisory AD-1—AD-19 % female 37% 26% % minority 17% 11% Again women and minorities are significantly less represented in the supervisory ranks than non-supervisory ranks 18 Noncareer staff are excluded % female 37% 26% % minority 17% 11% Again women and minorities are significantly less represented in the supervisory ranks than non-supervisory ranks 18 Noncareer staff are excluded ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 39 Workforce diversity by job title ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 39 Workforce diversity by job title Because the promotion potential for attorneys in the Litigating Divisions is to grade 15 and most attorneys achieve that grade early in their careers exploring diversity simply by grade as discussed above is not sufficient to assess the diversity of the leadership of the Department We should examine the demographic breakdowns by job title within the top grade as well Because the ppromotion ppotential for attorneys y in the Litigating g g Divisions is to ggrade 15 and most attorneys y achieve that ggrade early y in their careers exploring p g diversity y simply p y by y ggrade as discussed above is not sufficient to assess the diversityy of the leadership p of the Department p We should examine the demographic breakdowns by job title within the top grade as well Attorneys at grade 15 can fall into one of three categories Attorneys at grade 15 can fall into one of three categories § § § general non-supervisory attorneys supervisory attorneys such as Assistant Section Chiefs Deputy Section Chiefs or occasionally Section Chiefs or other categories denoting special status but not supervisory duties such as Senior Litigation Counsel Special Litigation Counsel Senior Counsel Counsel or Special Assistant to the Assistant Attorney General or Deputy Assistant Attorney General Attorney Advisor or other ad hoc or component-specific titles § § § g p y attorneys y general non-supervisory p y attorneys y such as Assistant Section Chiefs Deputy Section Chiefs or supervisory y Section Chiefs or occasionally g denoting g special p status but not supervisory p y duties such as Senior other categories g p g p Litigation Counsel Special Litigation Counsel Senior Counsel Counsel or Special p y Assistant Attorney General Assistant to the Assistant Attorneyy General or Deputy Attorney Advisor or other ad hoc or component-specific titles The distinction between these groups—particularly the supervisory and line non-supervisory attorneys—is very important as a practical matter Deputy and Assistant Section Chiefs have a fair deal of management responsibility in some Divisions and accession to one of these positions is considered a promotion Although many GS-15 non-supervisory attorneys particularly those at the Senior Counsel and similar levels may have significant authority and responsibility for major cases and play a key role in the Department of Justice’s organizational mission it is the attorneys at the supervisory levels who have the most significant impact on structural integration—because they are most likely to be on hiring or promotion committees contribute to performance appraisal and promotion decisions and allocate case assignments and rewards The distinction between these ggroups—particularly p p y the supervisory p y and line non-supervisory -s p y attorneys—is y very y important p p p y and Assistant Section Chiefs have a as a practical matter Deputy fair deal of management g responsibility p y in some Divisions and accession to one of these ppositions is considered a promotion p g manyy GS-15 non-supervisory p y attorneys y pparticularly y those Although at the Senior Counsel and similar levels may y have significant g authority y and responsibility p y for major j cases and play p y a keyy role in the Department p of Justice’s organizational g mission it is the attorneys y at the supervisory p y levels who have the most significant g p on structural impact integration—because g they y are most likely y to be on hiring g or ppromotion committees contribute to performance appraisal and promotion decisions and allocate case assignments and rewards We analyzed the breakdown of Litigating Division attorneys into these categories to attempt to ascertain whether the diversity illustrated at the GS-15 levels is independent of job title within the grade The following graphs divide the GS-15 attorney workforce into the three categories outlined above and display the gender and racial diversity in each category Each Division uses different titles but all follow the general framework described so that each Division’s attorneys can be comparably mapped to these three categories We analyzed y the breakdown of Litigating g g Division attorneys y into these categories g to attempt p to ascertain whether the diversityy illustrated at the GS-15 levels is independent p of jjob title within the grade g g p divide the GS-15 attorneyy workforce into the three categories g The followingg graphs outlined above and display p y the ggender and racial diversityy in each category g y Each Division uses different titles but all follow the general g framework described so that each Division’s attorneys can be comparably mapped to these three categories ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 40 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 40 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% KPMG CONSULTING Figure 3 2 3 3 Distribution of GS-15 attorneys by race Litigating Divisions Percent minority Percent minority Figure 3 2 3 3 Distribution of GS-15 attorneys by race Litigating Divisions ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE GS-15 non-supervisor GS-15 other GS-15 dep chief supervisor Minority 11% 9% 6% White 89% 91% 94% Component 0% GS-15 non-supervisor GS-15 other GS-15 dep chief supervisor Minority 11% 9% 6% White 89% 91% 94% Component ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 41 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 40% JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 41 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% KPMG CONSULTING Figure 3 2 3 4 Distribution of GS-15 attorneys by gender Litigating Divisions Percent minority Percent minority Figure 3 2 3 4 Distribution of GS-15 attorneys by gender Litigating Divisions ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 0% GS-15 non-supervisor GS-15 other GS-15 dep chief supervisor GS-15 non-supervisor GS-15 other GS-15 dep chief supervisor Female 37% 33% 33% Female 37% 33% 33% Male 63% 67% 67% Male 63% 67% 67% Component Component ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 42 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 42 Note that minorities are a higher proportion of the non-supervisory GS-15 workforce than the supervisory GS-15 workforce This pattern prevails across components for minorities see figure B 7 in appendix B The same disparity does not generally exist between men and women see also figure B 8 in appendix B Note that minorities are a higher g p p p y GS-15 workforce than the proportion of the non-supervisory supervisory p y GS-15 workforce This pattern p p p for minorities see figure g prevails across components B 7 in appendix pp The same disparity does not generally exist between men and women see B also figure B 8 in appendix B Similarly not all SESs hold equal job titles Most are Deputy Assistant Attorneys General or Section Chiefs or the equivalent but other titles such as Senior Counsel parallel the miscellaneous titles given to non-supervisory GS-15s The pattern of minorities being represented less in the higher ranks prevails in the SES group as well Figures B 7 and B 8 provide this detail by component Similarly y not all SESs hold equal q job j titles Most are Deputy p y Assistant Attorneys y General or Section Chiefs or the equivalent q but other titles such as Senior Counsel pparallel the miscellaneous titles given g to non-supervisory p y GS-15s The ppattern of minorities being g represented p less in the higher g ranks prevails in the SES group as well Figures B 7 and B 8 provide this detail by component U S Attorneys’ Offices use such titles as First Assistant U S Attorney Executive Assistant U S Attorney Chief Assistant U S Attorney and Deputy U S Attorney in addition to Supervisory Assistant U S Attorney However these titles are not used consistently across offices or at all in some offices so a similar analysis of the representation of women and minorities in strata of the supervisory Assistant U S Attorney ranks is not possible U S Attorneys’ y Offices use such titles as First Assistant U S Attorney y Executive Assistant U S Attorney y Chief Assistant U S Attorney y and Deputy p y U S Attorney y in addition to Supervisory p y Assistant U S Attorney y However these titles are not used consistentlyy across offices or at all in some offices so a similar analysis y of the representation p of women and minorities in strata of the supervisory Assistant U S Attorney ranks is nott possible p Summary of structural integration findings The findings in this section show that women and minorities are under-represented at the upper grade levels and even when they achieve those levels minorities continue to be underrepresented in supervisory job titles Summary of structural integration findings The findings g in this section show that women and minorities are under-represented p at the upper ggrade levels and even when they y achieve those levels minorities continue to be underrepresented in supervisory job titles ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 43 3 2 4 Inter-group conflict ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 43 3 2 4 Inter-group conflict Interviews and focus groups suggested that one of the key aspects of the organizational culture across the Department is its collegiality Attorneys—across gender racial and ethnic groups— stated that in cases and other professional interactions colleagues were willing to support and assist each other Daily interactions in the office were also characterized as positive and open without the type of gender or racial ethnic stratification evident in some organizations p suggested gg that one of the key y aspects p of the organizational g culture Interviews and focus ggroups p is its collegiality g y Attorneys—across y ggender racial and ethnic ggroups— p across the Department g were willingg to support pp and stated that in cases and other pprofessional interactions colleagues assist each other Dailyy interactions in the office were also characterized as ppositive and open n some organizations without the type of gender or racial ethnic stratification evident in Harassment behavior Harassment behavior One of the indicators of unhealthy tension or conflict in the workplace related to people’s group identifications is harassment behavior We addressed perceptions of racial and sexual harassment in the survey as an element of inter-group conflict p related to ppeople’s p group One of the indicators of unhealthyy tension or conflict in the workplace p p of racial and sexual identifications is harassment behavior We addressed perceptions harassment in the survey as an element of inter-group conflict We found that sexual harassment is not perceived by attorneys to be a problem in the Department but racial harassment is 19 The following figure displays the survey results in which we asked respondents about the past 24 months on harassment y to be a pproblem in the We found that sexual harassment is not pperceived byy attorneys p but racial harassment is 19 The following g figure g displays p y the survey results in Department which we asked respondents about the past 24 months onn hharassment Figure 3 2 4 1 Harassment survey responses Figure 3 2 4 1 Harassment survey responses Q31 I have personally experienced an incident of i l harassmen t Q32 I have personally experienced an incident f sexual h t Q31 I have personally y experi experienced enced an incident of i l harassmen t Q32 I have personally experienced an incident f sexual h t Minorities Women Minorities Women Whites Men Whites Men 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% The sexual harassment results are consistent with what we find in other organizations that have made a reasonable effort to educate employees on sexual harassment In fact the Department recently conducted a study of sexual harassment The racial harassment figures however indicate that minorities have experienced harassment at a rate three times that of whites There is no significant difference in reports of racial harassment between minority men and minority women and no significant difference in reports of sexual harassment between white women and minority women The sexual harassment results are consistent with what we find in other organizations that have g p y on sexual harassment In fact the Department p made a reasonable effort to educate employees y conducted a study y of sexual harassment The racial harassment figures g however recently p indicate that minorities have experienced harassment at a rate three times that of whites There g difference in reports p of racial harassment between minority y men and minority y is no significant women and no significant difference in reports of sexual harassment between white women and minority women We also asked in the survey whether observed incidents of sexual harassment are being reported Overall 71% of the sample said that they would report an incident 9% said they would not and 19% had no opinion Among the 80% expressing an opinion women were statistically g reported p We also asked in the surveyy whether observed incidents of sexual harassment are being p said that they y would report p an incident 9% said they y would not and Overall 71% of the sample 19% had no opinion Among the 80% expressing an opinion women were statistically 19 Early versions of the web survey did not include the racial harassment question so the number of responses to this question is lower than for the others although still statistically sufficient to draw conclusions 119 Early y versions of the web surveyy did not include the racial harassment qquestion so the number of responses to this question is lower than for the others although still statistically sufficient to draw conclusions c ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE PAGE 44 significantly less likely than men to say they would report observed incidents—84% for women versus 93% for men KPMG CONSULTING Racial and gender tension We also measured the inter-group conflict climate factor by asking directly about levels of specific types of conflict and tension within the Department Although most respondents reported a lack of gender- and race-related conflict on the survey there were statistically significantly different responses to this question across demographic groups The following figure displays these responses We also measured the inter-group g p conflict climate factor by y asking g directly y about levels of specific p types yp of conflict and tension within the Department p Although g most respondents p reported p a lack of ggender- and race-related conflict on the survey y there were statistically y significantly g y different responses p to this question across demographic groups The following figure displays these responses Figure 3 2 4 2 Racial and gender tension survey responses Q2-1 There is tension and conflict here between men and women Figure 3 2 4 2 Racial and gender tension survey responses Q2-2 There is tension and conflict here between whites and minorities Q2-1 Q Q2 -1 There r is s ttension ension and d conf conflict lictt he here r betw re between tween nm men en and women d wo w m n me Q2-2 There is Q2-2 s tension tension and c co conflict nflict c h here ere betwe between w en whites minorities w ites wh s and a mi m norities Women Minorities Women Minorities Men Whites Men Whites 10% 20% PAGE 44 significantly g y less likely than men to say theyy would report observed incidents—84% for women versus 93% for men Racial and gender tension 0% JUNE 14 2002 30% 40% 0% 10% 20% 30% Another element related to this finding is communication between gender and racial ethnic groups We provide these results in section 3 2 5 Summary of inter-group conflict findings Findings on this factor are mixed When we asked attorneys to characterize the climate overall they stressed the collegiality and inclusiveness of their peer interactions However when we explicitly asked in the survey whether sexual or racial ethnic tension or harassment occurred in the workplace a substantial portion of minority attorneys answered in the affirmative 40% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 0% 10% 20% 30% Another element related to this findingg is communication between gender and racial ethnic groups We provide these results in section n 3 2 5 Summary of inter-group conflict findings Findings g on this factor are mixed When we asked attorneys y to characterize the climate overall they y stressed the collegiality g y and inclusiveness off their peer p interactions However when we explicitly p y asked in the survey y whether sexual or racial ethnic tension or harassment occurred in the workplace a substantial portion of minority attorneys answered in the affirmative 40% ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 45 3 2 5 Informal integration ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 45 3 2 5 Informal integration The structural integration dimension of the Interactional Model addresses access to formal authority and decision-making influence This is a critical but insufficient picture of the level of integration or inclusiveness of a work culture Research indicates that another important factor is participation in the informal networks and power structures of the organization Informal integration takes several forms including day-to-day interactions between staff as well as more structured mentoring experiences Mentoring The structural integration g dimension of the Interactional Model addresses access to formal authorityy and decision-making g influence This is a critical but insufficient ppicture of the level of integration g p factor is or inclusiveness of a work culture Research indicates that another important pparticipation p in the informal f l networks and ppower structures of the organization g Informal integration g takes several forms including day-to-day interactions between staff as well as more structured mentoring experiences Mentoring Statistical analysis of survey data shows that the amount of mentoring support that a DOJ attorney says that he she has received is a predictor of other outcomes such as likelihood to stay in the organization career satisfaction and the willingness to recommend DOJ to other people for employment Statistical analysis y of surveyy data shows that the amount of mentoring g support pp that a DOJ attorneyy says y that he she has received is a ppredictor of other outcomes such as likelihood to stay y in the organization g career satisfaction and the willingness to recommend DOJ to other people for employment Additionally data show that DOJ attorneys’ perceptions of the value they derived from mentoring has a significant impact on their job involvement see section 3 3 3 for a discussion of job involvement and that all else being equal mentoring has an even greater impact on job involvement for women than for men and to a lesser extent for minorities than for whites Additionally y data show that DOJ attorneys’ y pperceptions p of the value they y derived from mentoringg has a significant g p on their job j involvement see impact section 3 3 3 for a discussion of jjob involvement and that all else beingg equal q mentoringg has an even ggreater impact p on jjob involvement for women than for men and to a lesser extent for minorities than for whites Given these results it is important to know whether or not people of different gender and race groups have equal access to the benefits of mentoring The survey question on this topic suggests that women and minorities believe that they do not Given these results it is important p p p of different ggender and race to know whether or not people ggroups p have equal q access to the benefits of mentoring g The survey question on this topic suggests that women and minorities believe that they do not Figure 3 2 5 1 Benefits from mentoring survey responses Q18-2 During my career a mentor has actively supported me for a desirable lateral move or promotion Figure 3 2 5 1 Benefits from mentoring survey responses Q18-2 During my career a mentor has actively supported me for a desirable lateral move or promotion Q18-2 During my Q18-2 my career career a mentor m mentorr has ha as actively ac ctively supported me ffo forr a de desirable move promotion support r ed m sirable lateral m mo ove or promo m tion Q18-2 During my Q18-2 my ca career reer a m mentor mentorr has ha as ac actively ctively supported forr a de desirable move promotion support r ed m me ffo sirable lateral m mo ove or promo m tion Minorities Women Minorities Women Whites Men Whites Men 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Informal networks Informal networks are an important part of the environment in any professional organization and generally have a role in both the perceived and actual status and success of individuals In DOJ this aspect of the work environment is particularly relevant because a good deal of work e g cases is conducted in teams depending on the component 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Informal networks p part p of the environment in any y pprofessional organization g and Informal networks are an important generally g y have a role in both the pperceived and actual status and success of individuals In DOJ this aspect p of the work environment is particularly p y relevant because a good deal of work e g cases is conducted in teams depending on the component ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE PAGE 46 Many attorneys reported that cliques and other informal networks are a part of daily interaction These types of networks are of course present in any organization but we sought to determine both whether they have a racial ethnic or gender effect and whether they are perceived as especially important to attorneys’ career opportunities and advancement outcomes In focus groups and interviews minorities repeatedly expressed the belief that exclusive informal networks limit their access to communication with managers premium job assignments mentoring promotions and other career growth outcomes KPMG CONSULTING Communication Another element of informal integration is communication—in particular respondents’ perception of their ability to communicate with other groups in the organization The following figure provides results from the survey about this aspect Another element of informal integration g is communication—in particular p respondents’ p pperception p of their ability y to communicate with other ggroups in the organization The following figure provides results from the survey about this aspect Figure 3 2 5 2 Communication survey responses Q4-2 Communications are good here between whites and minorities Figure 3 2 5 2 Communication survey responses Q4-1 Communications are good here between men and women Q4-2 Q Q4 -2 2 Communications are good here betwe between w en whites and minorities Q4-1 -1 Communications are good here between men and women Minorities Women Minorities Women Whites Men Whites White t s Men 20% PAGE 46 Manyy attorneys y reported p that cliques q and other informal networks are a part p of daily y interaction These types yp of networks are of course ppresent in any y organization g but we sought g to determine effect and whether they both whether theyy have a racial ethnic or gender g y are perceived p as especially p y important p to attorneys’ y career opportunities pp r and advancement outcomes In focus ggroups p and interviews minorities repeatedly p y expressed p the belief that exclusive informal networks limit their access to communication with managers g premium job assignments mentoring promotions and other career growth outcomes Communication 0% JUNE 14 2002 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Note that on the whole attorneys rate communication as a positive element of the work climate Again though there is a statistically significant gap between whites and minorities Summary of informal integration findings 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Note that on the whole attorneys y rate communication as a ppositive element of the work climate Again though there is a statistically significant gap between whites and d minorities Summary of informal integration findings As discussed in the previous section on inter-group conflict DOJ is characterized by collegiality and inclusiveness across demographic lines However those results combine with the findings presented in this section to make the study inconclusive in this area It is possible that minorities perceive that their interactions and communication with their peers are healthy but their interactions with their superiors—which will eventually result in improved career opportunity and increased advancement—are less fair As discussed in the p previous section on inter-group g p conflict DOJ is characterized by y collegiality g and inclusiveness across demographic g p lines However those results combine with the findings g presented in this section to make the study p y inconclusive in this area It is ppossible that minorities perceive that their interactions and communication with their peers p p y but their are healthy interactions with their superiors—which p will eventually result in improved career opportunity and increased advancement—are less fair While we were unable to determine whether this negative perception corresponds to reality we do find that the perception in and of itself is relevant for the Department We also note two other findings cited throughout this report—the lack of diversity in management ranks and a lack of transparency in HR practices—which contribute to this perception and which can be improved While we were unable to determine r whether this negative g pperception p corresponds p to reality y we do find that the perception p p p We also note two other in and of itself is relevant for the Department findings g cited throughout g p g t ranks and a lack of this report—the lack of diversityy in management transparency in HR practices—which contribute to this perception and which can be improved 100% ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE PAGE 47 3 2 6 Stereotyping KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 47 3 2 6 Stereotyping When people are stereotyped adverse outcomes usually occur due to false attributions to individuals based on prior anecdotal experiences or traditional characterizations taken from folklore literature or media portrayals We defined stereotyping in the survey as “assuming people have negative traits or limited abilities based on their race gender age job etc ” When ppeople p are stereotyped yp adverse outcomes usuallyy occur due to false attributions to individuals based on prior p p anecdotal experiences or traditional characterizations taken from folklore literature or media pportrayals y We defined stereotyping yp g in the surveyy as “assuming people have negative traits orr limited abilities based on their race gender age job etc ” Our main findings are as follows Our main findings are as follows § § § § 14% of attorneys believe women are often stereotyped at DOJ 22% believe racial minorities are often stereotyped 11% believe white men are often stereotyped and 32% believe people are stereotyped based on their component office 20 § § § § We find these figures to be relatively low Of more concern though is that responses are statistically significantly different across demographic groups The following figure presents the results of the survey question about stereotyping y believe women are often stereotyped yp at DOJ 14% of attorneys yp 22% believe racial minorities are often stereotyped 11% believe white men are often stereotyped and 32% believe people are stereotyped based on their component office 20 We find these figures g to be relatively y low Of more concern though g is that responses p are statistically y significantly g y different across demographic g groups The following figure presents the results of the survey question about stereotyping Figure 3 2 6 1 Stereotyping survey responses Figure 3 2 6 1 Stereotyping survey responses Q3-2 Racial minorities are often stereotyped here Q3-1 Women are often stereotyped here Q3-2 -2 Racial minorities are oft often f en stereot stereotyped o ype y d here Q3-1 -1 Women W men are often stereotyped Wo stereotyp y ed here Women Minorities Women Minorities Men Whites Men Whites 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Note that more than 40% of racial minorities participating in the study believe that stereotyping of minorities as having limited abilities is a problem Further analysis shows that an actual majority 51% of non-white women hold this belief Although we do not know the extent to which this belief is based on actual differential treatment of people it clearly represents a barrier to the goal of creating an environment where all members feel equally valued and able to contribute 20 As we discuss in section 3 2 1 the fact that gender and especially racial diversity vary widely by component and geography could be correlated with this survey result 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Note that more than 40% of racial minorities pparticipating p g in the studyy believe that stereotyping yp of minorities as havingg limited abilities is a problem p Further analysis y shows that an actual majority j y 51% of non-white women hold this belief Although g we do not know the extent to which this belief is based on actual differential treatment of ppeople p it clearly y represents p a barrier to the goal g of creating an environment where all members feel equally valued and able to contribute 20 As we discuss in section 3 2 1 the fact that ggender and especially racial diversity vary widely by component and geography could be correlated with this survey result 50% ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 48 3 2 7 Human resources systems ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 48 3 2 7 Human resources systems Good diversity management begins with good human resources management HRM Therefore human resources systems—or the processes through which attorneys are recruited hired evaluated and promoted as well as how their careers are developed—are an important part of the Interactional Model Good diversityy management g g with good g a resources management g HRM Therefore begins human human resources systems—or y the pprocesses through g which attorneys y are recruited hired evaluated and ppromoted as well as how their careers are developed—are an important part of the Interactional Model We focused a good deal on HR systems in the study We sought both to ascertain whether attorneys believe that DOJ’s HR systems are fair and to determine objectively whether the way that these processes are conducted is likely to positively neutrally or negatively affect gender and racial ethnic diversity The following sections discuss each system in turn We focused a ggood deal on HR systems y in the study y We sought g both to ascertain whether attorneys y believe that DOJ’s HR systems y are fair and to determine objectively j y whether the wayy that these pprocesses are conducted is likely y to ppositively y neutrally y or negatively g y affect gender and racial ethnic diversity The following sections discuss each system in turn 3 2 7 1 Recruiting 3 2 7 1 Recruiting Of all of the HRM practices required to maintain a diverse workforce recruiting is in some sense the most important because the diversity of the applicant pool sets an upper bound on the diversity of an organization’s workforce The Department recognizes this fact and in the past its most visible and focused efforts to increase the diversity of the attorney workforce have been in the area of recruiting especially for entry-level attorneys Of all of the HRM practices p required q to maintain a diverse workforce recruiting g is in some sense the most important p because the diversity y of the applicant pp ppool sets an upper pp bound on the diversity y of an organization’s g workforce The Department pa recognizes g this fact and in the ppast its most visible and focused efforts to increase the diversityy of the attorney workforce have been in the area of recruiting especially for entry-level attorneys This section discusses recruiting or the set of practices that lead to an attorney applying for a position with the Department Because the practices involved in selecting and hiring attorneys— which begin when the recruitment process ends—are separate in terms of who administers them how they are administered and their potential impact on diversity these are discussed in a separate the next section This section discusses recruiting g or the set of ppractices that lead to an attorney y applying pp y g for a pposition with the Department p Because the ppractices involved in selecting g and hiring g attorneys— y which begin g when the recruitment process p ends—are separate p in terms of who administers them how theyy are administered and their potential impact on diversity these are discussed in a separate the next section The Department recruits attorneys directly out of law school through the Attorney General’s Honors Program and recruits experienced attorneys known as lateral hires through various means Each of these is discussed below The Department p y directly y outt of law school through g the Attorney y General’s recruits attorneys Honors Program g and recruits experienced p attorneys known as laterall hires through various means Each of these is discussed below Honors Program recruiting Honors Program recruiting The Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management OARM recruits attorneys directly from law school on behalf of Department components via the Attorney General’s Honors Program For the Honors Program OARM The Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management OARM recruits attorneys directly from law school on behalf of Department components via the Attorney General’s Honors Program For the Honors Program OARM § § § § § § § § collects vacancy information from any component which wishes to participate generates marketing materials about employment at DOJ advertises at law schools on behalf of the Department mans booths at career fairs and other events performs special outreach to law schools of historically black colleges and universities minority law student organizations and other organizations collects applications and component preferences from candidates arranges interviews on campus at which components send interviewers to screen candidates and handles administrative aspects of offers including background checks and offer letters § § § § § § § § collects vacancy information from any component which wishes to participate generates marketing materials about employment at DOJ advertises at law schools on behalf of the Department mans booths at career fairs and other events performs special outreach to law schools of historically black colleges and universities minority law student organizations and other organizations collects applications and component preferences from candidates arranges interviews on campus at which components send interviewers to screen candidates and handles administrative aspects of offers including background checks and offer letters ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 49 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 49 OARM does not participate in candidate selection it only administers recruiting on components’ behalf and arranges components to interview candidates on campus and take over the selection process from there OARM does however keep substantial data on the number of applicants interviewees selectees and new hires i e who accepted offers OARM does not pparticipate p in candidate selection it onlyy administers recruiting g on components’ p behalf and arranges g components p to interview candidates on campus p and take over the selection pprocess from there OARM does however keep p substantial data on the number of applicants interviewees selectees and new hires i e i who accepted offers OARM also administers the Summer Law Intern Program which provides paid internships to law school students and a volunteer intern program The Summer Program is administered comparably to and simultaneously with the Honors Program Components use the Summer Program as a pipeline to generate Honors Program candidates to varying degrees although not as much as might be expected OARM also administers the Summer Law Intern Program g which provides p paid p internships p to law school students and a volunteer intern program p g The Summer Program g is administered comparably p y to and simultaneously y with the Honors Program g Components p use the Summer Program g as a ppipeline p to ggenerate Honors Program candidates to varying degrees although not as much as might be expected Components utilize the Honors Program to varying degrees Participating components generally identify vacancies by Section or the equivalent including by locale in some components — numbering in the handful per year for each component—and use committees of attorneys and managers to conduct the interviewing and hiring and then use committees of managers and senior managers to make final selections The Litigating Divisions BOP INS and EOIR make heavy use of the Honors Program The U S Trustees program uses it sparingly due to the nature of its workforce and U S Attorneys’ Offices generally do not hire entry-level attorneys with some recent exceptions Components p g y g degrees g p g components p ggenerally utilize the Honors Program to varying Participating identifyy vacancies by y Section or the equivalent q including g by y locale in some components — p numberingg in the handful per p year y for each component—and p use committees of attorneys y and managers g to conduct the interviewing g and hiring g and then use committees of managers g and senior se o managers a age s to make a e final a se selections ect o s Thee Litigating t gat g Divisions v s o s BOP O INS NS aand d EOIR O make a e heavyy use of the Honors Program g The U S Trustees pprogram g uses it sparingly p g y due to the nature oof its ts workforce wo o ce and a d U S U S Attorneys’ Offices generally do not hire entry-level attorneys with some recent exceptions Managers throughout the Department are virtually unanimous in their acclaim for the program particularly its outreach targeted at a diverse student pool In fact OARM cites two main benefits of the Honors Program Managers g throughout g the Department p are virtuallyy unanimous in their acclaim for the pprogram g pparticularly y its outreach targeted g at a diverse student pool In fact OARM cites two main benefits of the Honors Program § § it allows the Department to have a unified professional presence on campus and economies of scale in the recruiting process and its ability to conduct outreach to a diverse market which OARM bolsters by maintaining extensive contact lists for minority organizations § § p it allows the Department to have a unified pprofessional presence on campus and economies of scale in the recruitingg pprocess and y to conduct outreach to a diverse market which OARM bolsters by its ability maintaining extensive contact lists for minority organizations Others throughout the components echo the success of the Honors Program in recruiting a highquality labor force as well as a diverse one Some participants however expressed the concern that the Honors Program does not recruit at a wide enough variety of law schools especially those that are likely to have an especially high population of minority students although results of our independent assessment do not concur with this perception Others throughout g the components p echo the success of the Honors Program g in recruiting g a highg qquality y labor force as well as a diverse one Some participants p p however expressed p the concern that the Honors Program g does not recruit at a wide enough g variety y of law schools especially p y those that are likelyy to have an especially p y high g ppopulation p of minority students although results of our independent assessment do not concur with this perception The Summer Law Intern Program is also regarded as successful throughout the Department The Summer Law Intern Program is also regarded as successful throughout the Department Above all the Department reports that it does not have difficulty recruiting a diverse pool of entry-level attorneys because of the desirability of the job Figures on applicant flow bolster this point as the Department routinely gets hundreds of applicants for every entry-level position that it has open Therefore it is unknown to what degree OARM can be credited for this diversity or whether the office is simply not necessary to achieve it At the very least DOJ benefits from the unified campus presence and centralized recruiting logistics that the Honors Program provides p reports p r that it does not have difficultyy recruiting g a diverse ppool of Above all the Department y y because of the desirability y of the jjob Figures g pp entry-level attorneys on applicant flow bolster this p as the Department p y ggets hundreds off applicants pp for every y entry-level y pposition that point routinely p g OARM can be credited for this diversity y or it has open Therefore it is unknown to what degree p y not necessary y to achieve it At the veryy least DOJ benefits from the whether the office is simply unified campus presence and centralized recruiting logistics that the Honors Program provides ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 50 Lateral recruiting ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 50 Lateral recruiting The organization and centralization of entry-level recruiting outreach is in contrast with the ad hoc nature of lateral recruiting Components report that they generally fill lateral vacancies justin-time as attorneys leave They cite that they generally cannot predict vacancies—nor the availability of budgetary resources to expand their attorney workforce—far enough in advance to recruit via a methodology such as the Honors Program g y The organization and centralization of entry-level recruitingg outreach is in contrast with the ad r g Components p report p that they y ggenerally y fill lateral vacancies justhoc nature of lateral recruiting in-time as attorneys y leave They y cite that they y ggenerally y cannot ppredict vacancies—nor the availabilityy of budgetary g y resources to expand p their attorney workforce—far enough in advance to recruit via a methodology such as the Honors Program Components also report that like the entry-level market the lateral attorney market sees DOJ attorney jobs as very desirable They typically get hundreds of resumes for each opening and hundreds of unsolicited resumes each year As a result many components cite their ability to attract a diverse applicant pool—although less diverse than the Honors Program pool—for lateral vacancies Components p p that like the entry-level y y market sees DOJ also report market the lateral attorney attorneyy jobs j yp y get g hundreds of resumes for each opening p g and as veryy desirable Theyy typically hundreds of unsolicited resumes each yyear As a result many y components p cite their ability y to attract a diverse applicant pool—although less diverse than the Honors Program pool—for lateral vacancies For attorneys other than those in the SES the Department is exempt from U S Office of Personnel Management OPM rules requiring that all positions be advertised and undergo what is known as a competitive selection process This exemption means that no position need be advertised—nor even exist—to be filled by the Department Due to the way that the Honors Program is administered this exempted status does not result in a lack of advertising for entrylevel positions but it does have a significant impact on advertising for lateral recruiting The exempted status of attorney positions is intended to and does give components maximal flexibility in hiring For attorneys y other than those in the SES the Department p p from U S Office of is exempt Personnel Management g rules requiring q g that all positions p g what OPM be advertised and undergo is known as a competitive p selection pprocess This exemption p means that no pposition need be advertised—nor even exist—to be filled byy the Department p Due to the way y that the Honors Program g p status does not result in a lack of advertisingg for entryy is administered this exempted level ppositions but it does have a significant g impact p on advertising g for lateral recruiting g The exempted p status of attorney positions is intended to and does give components maximal flexibility in hiring When components do advertise they tend to use sources such as the Washington Post Legal Times National Law Journal and DOJ and component web sites Some components report using specialized publications or meetings targeted toward their field of the law and a few report advertising in publications or at meetings geared toward minorities When components p do advertise they y tend to use sources such as the Washington g g Post Legal Times National Law Journal and DOJ and component p web sites Some components p report p usingg specialized p ppublications or meetings g targeted g d toward their field of the law and a few report advertising in publications or at meetings geared toward minorities We found that lateral recruiting processes vary substantially by component and vary substantially by office in applicable components—by Section in the Litigating Divisions District in the INS District in the U S Attorneys’ Offices and District or Division in the U S Trustees component The head of the respective office e g Section Chief District Counsel or Assistant U S Trustee has wide latitude in establishing policies and procedures for recruitment We found that lateral recruiting g processes p vary y substantiallyy by y component p and vary y substantiallyy byy office in applicable pp components—by p y Section in the Litigating g g Divisions District in the INS District in the U S Attorneys’ y Offices and District or Division in the U S Trustees component p The head of the respective p office e g g Section Chief District Counsel or Assistant U S Trustee has wide latitude in establishing policies and procedures for recruitment Participants in the study repeatedly cited several perceptions as limitations on the Department’s ability to attract a diverse applicant pool for lateral vacancies Participants p in the studyy repeatedly p y cited several pperceptions p as limitations on the Department’s ability to attract a diverse applicant pool for lateral vacancies § § § § a lack of diversity in the relevant labor pool to begin with for some areas of legal practice advertising for lateral positions that does not reach a broad base or a lack of advertising at all relatedly the influence of personal connections which might be less available to minority groups on one’s ability to obtain an attorney job at DOJ and intense competition for women and minorities by private law firms § § § § a lack of diversity in the relevant labor pool to begin with for some areas of legal ppractice advertising g for lateral positions that does not reach a broad base or a lack of advertising g at all relatedly y the influence of ppersonal connections which might g be less available to minority y ggroups p on one’s ability y to obtain an attorney y jjob at DOJ and intense competition for women and minorities by private law firms ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 51 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 51 The first of these factors is cited by components that view themselves as having a more specialized labor force namely the Tax Division Antitrust Division Environmental and Natural Resources Division and U S Trustees Managers in these components expressed a belief that not a lot of minorities and to a lesser extent women besides in ENR practice tax antitrust environmental or bankruptcy law The first of these factors is cited byy components p that view themselves as having g a more specialized p labor force namely y the Tax Division Antitrust Division Environmental and Natural Resources Division and U S Trustees Managers g in these components p p expressed a belief that not a lot of minorities and a to a lesser extent women besides in ENR practice tax antitrust environmental or bankruptcy law However several other observers including other DOJ managers and private bar associations suggested that this serves as a convenient excuse but does not suffice to explain the comparatively low diversity In the study we were not able to evaluate the merit of either side of this disagreement but we did arrive at several findings based on discussions with components and industry groups However several other observers includingg other t g and ppr ivate bar associations DOJ managers private gg that this serves as a convenient excuse but does not suffice to explain p the suggested p y low diversity y In the study y we were not able to evaluate the merit of either side of comparatively this disagreement g but we did arrive at several findings based on discussions with components and industry groups § § § § Internal Best Practice Components do not appear to have exhausted all of the viable outreach avenues for diverse lateral Broadening the Base attorneys Most do not routinely advertise at conferences or events or in publications geared Both the Environment and Natural Resources Division and Executive Office for U S Trustees toward a diverse audience Although most have gotten a bit more creative in defining components believe that they possess access to a qualifications for experienced attorney national labor market in the sense that candidates positions They are focusing on attorneys who would relocate to take their positions some EOIR are bright and motivated but might not be for example seem to unduly limit the geographic experts in environment or bankruptcy law They figure that these attorneys can learn the scope of their recruiting presence although this details of the practice once they get on board could be due to resource constraints This type of thinking sometimes takes more The Department could implement a variety of effort than simply looking for someone with the creative programs such as education campaigns same skill set as the attorney who just departed targeted to younger law students or even but can yield good results for quality as well as undergraduates to increase exposure to these fields diversity among a diverse pool DOJ could partner with industry—through associations or private companies or law firms—on these presentations Other possible options include rotational programs either across DOJ components or even with industry 21 Components could be more creative in assessing candidates’ qualifications for positions That is the conventional perception that one must be a professional antitrust lawyer to be a viable candidate for the Antitrust Division might merit reexamination in some cases Doing so could broaden the base for each potential vacancy increasing diversity in the process Components do not focus enough on filling positions with attorneys from other components or even from other offices in the same component Considering attorneys in other areas in the Department for Assistant Section Chief openings for example can create the perception and the reality that there are more advancement opportunities available for attorneys who find themselves in Sections with low attrition in management ranks 21 There are significant constraints to partnering with private firms on legal rotation programs but it may be feasible to design a program that would yield benefits for the Department the private employer and the attorney while serving to improve DOJ diversity § IInternal Inte rrnal Be Best est Prac Practice tice Components do not appear to have exhausted all oof Broadening the Base the viable outreach avenues for diverse lateral latera late attorneys Most do not routinely advertise aat conferences or events or in publications ggeared Both Bo oth the Environment and Natural Resources Division Di ivision and Executive Office ff ffor U S Trustees toward a diverse audience Although mos most gotten g a bit more creative in defining f have components p believe that they y ppossess access to a q f ffor experienced p qualifications attorneyy national labor market in the sense that candidate candidates positions ppo ositions Theyy are focusing f g on attorneys y who would relocate to take their positions p some EOIR EOIR are bright g and motivated but might g not be fo or example p seem to unduly y limit the geographic g g p for p p y law experts in environment or bankruptcy fg that these attorneys y can learn the Theyy figure scope p of their recruitingg presence p although this details off the ppractice once theyy gget on board could be due to resource constraints yp off thinkingg sometimes takes more This type § The Department p could implement p a variety y of p y looking g ffor someone with the effort than simply creative programs p g such as education campaigns same skill set as the attorneyy who jjust departed p targeted g d to yyounger g law students or even y but can yield good results for quality as well as diversity undergraduates g to increase exposure p to these fields among g a diverse ppool DOJ could ppartner with industry— y—through g associations or private p p industry—through companies or law firms—on these ppresentations Other ppossible options p include rotational programs either across DOJ 21 2 components p nts or even with industry y § Co Components po e ts could cou d be more o e creative c eat ve in assessing assess g ca candidates’ d dates qua qualifications cat o s for o positions pos t o s That at is s tthee co conventional ve t o a pe perception cept o tthat at oonee must ust be a pprofessional o ess o a aantitrust t t ust lawyer awye to be a vviable ab e ca candidate d date for o tthee Antitrust t t ust Division v s o might g t merit e t reeexamination a at o in some so e cases Doing o g so cou could d broaden the base for each potential vacancy vaca cy increasing c eas g ddiversity ve s ty in the t e pprocess ocess § Co Components po e ts do not ot focus ocus enough e oug on o fillingg pos positions to sw with t atto attorneys eys from o ot other components co po e ts or o even eve from o other ot e offices o ces in tthee sa samee co component po e t Co Considering s de g attorneys y in other areas in the Department p t for Assistant Section Chief openings p g for example p can create the pperception p and the realityy that there are more advancement opportunities pp available for attorneys who find themselves in Sections with low attrition in management ranks 2211 There are significant g constraints to ppartnering g with pprivate firms on legal g rotation pprograms g but it may be feasible to design g a pprogram g that would yield benefits for the Department the private employer and the attorney attorney while serving to improve DOJ diversity diversity ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 52 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 52 We expand upon these issues where applicable in the recommendations section We expand upon these issues where applicable in the recommendations section There is also fairly widespread concern especially among minority groups and individuals over the fact that because it is exempt from relevant OPM regulations the Department does not need to advertise each attorney position Some attorneys and HR administrators expressed the view that this allows the selection process to be unfair more attorneys and HR administrators expressed that this allowed the perception of unfairness to enter the selection process This leads to the perception in the marketplace that one cannot get a job as a lateral DOJ attorney without some sort of personal or political connection We heard this perception expressed to a moderate extent both inside and outside the Department There is also fairlyy widespread p concern especially p y among g minority y ggroups p and individuals over the fact that because it is exempt p from relevantt OPM regulations g the Department p does not need to advertise each attorneyy position p Some attorneys y and HR administrators expressed p the view that this allows the selection pprocess to be unfair more attorneys y and HR administrators expressed p that this allowed the perception p p of unfairness to enter the selection pprocess This leads p in the marketplace p that one cannot gget a jjob as a lateral DOJ attorneyy without to the pperception p p some sort of personal or political connection We heard this perception expressed to a moderate extent both inside and outside the Department Some components for example the Civil Rights Division say that they advertise all positions Most components say that they advertise most positions Of course merely advertising positions does not guarantee a bona fide open selection process in fact the organization would only be doing the labor market a disservice if it nominally advertised for vacancies but really did not intend to consider outside applications but the Civil Rights Division assures that the process is open to all There is no way to really assess the true degree Internal Best Practice of openness of the process now but we note in our ………………………… recommendations section that components should at least store more data on applicant flow for lateral positions p for example p the Civil Rights g Division say y that they y advertise all ppositions Some components p y that they y advertise most ppositions Of course merely y advertising g ppositions Most components say p selection pprocess in fact the organization g would only y be does not gguarantee a bona fide open y advertised for vacancies but reallyy did not doingg the labor market a disservice if it nominally but the Civil Rights g Division assures that the pprocess is intend to consider outside applications p to all There is no way y to really y assess the true degree open IInternal In nternal r l Best e Prac Practice tice p of the pprocess now but we note in our of openness ………………………… p should at least recommendations section that components store more data on applicant flow for lateral positions The Civil Rights Division conducts an annual “open season ” when attorneys have the option to change Sections within the Division Attorneys draft a memorandum outlining which Section they would like to move to and why Chiefs review the memos and grant transfers We do not recommend that the Department seek to abandon its exemptions to OPM rules but as we discuss in the recommendations section DOJ should define vacancies and conduct a conscientious open selection process for many if not most positions It should also attempt to counter the perception that it does not advertise by conducting active outreach to sources with diverse targets that yield visible results In addition to the negative perceptions that it allows to be created another adverse side effect of this OPM exemption is that the Department does not have data on applicant flow for lateral vacancies Because a vacancy need not exist to make a hire “vacancies” and “applicants” are not well-defined for all new hiring situations The Civil Rights g Division conducts an annual “ oopen p season ” when attorneys y have the option “open to change g Sections within the Division Attorneys y draft ft a memorandum outlining g which Section theyy would like to move to and why y Chiefs review the memos and grant transfers We do not recommend that the Department p seek to abandon its exemptions p to OPM rules but as we discuss in the recommendations section DOJ should define vacancies and p selection process p for many y if conduct a conscientious open ott most ost positions pos t o s Itt should s ou d also a so attempt atte pt to counter cou te the t e not perception pe cept o that t at itt does not o advertise by by conducting active outreach to sources with diverse targets that yield visible results In addition to the negative g p p perceptions that it allows to be created another adverse side effect of is that the Department does not have data on applicant this OPM exemption p p pp flow for lateral vacancies Because a vacancy y need not exist to make a hire “vacancies” and “applicants” are not well-defined for all new hiring situations Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program Between 1997 and 2001 the Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management instituted the Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program LARP on a pilot basis The program was implemented in an effort to leverage some of the successful practices that OARM had employed in the Honors Program for lateral recruiting Increasing diversity was an explicit rationale for LARP Between 1997 and 2001 the Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management instituted the Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program LARP on a pilot basis The program was implemented in an effort to leverage some of the successful practices that OARM had employed in the Honors Program for lateral recruiting Increasing diversity was an explicit rationale for LARP Opinion varies about the rationale for and success of the program More components than not believe that it had a positive impact on lateral recruitment and diversity recruitment in particular Some components regard it as a waste of resources Most components also cited what were known to be challenges from the program’s onset the difficulty in using a centralized recruitment outreach program because of the unpredictability in vacancies and component Opinion p varies about the rationale for and success of the pprogram g More components p than not believe that it had a ppositive impact p on lateral recruitment and diversity y recruitment in pparticular Some components p regard g p also cited what were it as a waste of resources Most components known to be challenges g from the pprogram’s g onset the difficultyy in using g a centralized recruitment outreach program because of the unpredictability in vacancies and component ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 53 budgets the lack of resources afforded to the program and components’ concerns which seem to be unfounded that they would lose autonomy in selection ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 53 budgets g the lack of resources afforded to the pprogram g and components’ concerns w which h seem to be unfounded that they would lose autonomy in selection 3 2 7 2 Selection hiring 3 2 7 2 Selection hiring The way that components evaluate applicants in order to make selections and extend offers varies by component and by office within each component Section Chiefs or the equivalent have wide discretion in establishing selection processes and criteria The breadth of personnel who have involvement in the process and influence on who gets selected varies significantly Components concurred with our experience from other organizations that the diversity of perspectives represented among those involved in the selection process will impact the outcome The way y that components p pp evaluate applicants inn order to make selections and extend offers varies byy component p and by y office within each component p Section Chiefs or the equivalent q have wide discretion in establishingg selection processes p and criteria The breadth of ppersonnel who have involvement in the process p g and influence on who ggets selected varies significantly Components p concurred with our experience p from other organizations g that the diversity y of perspectives represented among those involved in n the selection process will impact the outcome Most components use line managers including Assistant Section Chiefs or the equivalent for interviewing and screening Generally more senior attorneys at the Section Chief level and above have substantial influence on ultimate decisions In the Litigating Divisions an individual at the level of a Deputy Assistant Attorney General or Assistant Attorney General is generally required for a final decision certainly for lateral hires In the INS BOP and EOIR a headquarters manager like the Associate General Counsel for Human Resources or the equivalent makes the final decision U S Attorneys’ Offices and U S Trustees make hiring decisions entirely in the field Most components p g including g Assistant Section Chiefs or the equivalent q for use line managers interviewingg and screening g Generally y more senior attorneys y at the Section Chief level and above have substantial influence on ultimate decisions In the Litigating g g Divisions an individual at the level of a Deputy p y Assistant Attorney y General or Assistant Attorney y General is ggenerally required q for a final decision certainly y for lateral hires In the INS BOP and EOIR a headquarters q manager g like the Associate General Counsel for Human Resources or the equivalent q makes the final decision U S Attorneys’ Offices and U S Trustees make hiring decisions entirely in the field Hiring for SES positions is defined largely by the Office of Personnel Management panels comprised of current Section Chiefs and DAAGs evaluate candidates and the Assistant Attorney General or the equivalent makes the final decision OARM has a role in performing background checks and other administrative aspects of hiring Hiring g for SES positions p g y byy the Office of Personne g panels p is defined largely Personnell Management comprised of current Section Chiefs and DAAGs evaluate candidates and the Assistan Assistant Attorney q makes the final decision OARM has a role in performing General or the equivalent background checks and other administrative aspects of hiring Since components usually use panels to evaluate candidates at at least one stage the issues of who serves on the panel and how the panel operates are important It is clear according to our experience and the input of attorneys and human resources administrators we spoke to for the study that the more diverse the selection panel is the more diverse selectees will be all else being equal This is not necessarily because individuals are overtly biased—we found few accusations and no evidence that any of those responsible for selection are overtly discriminating against women minorities or any other group—but because individuals by nature tend to favor applicants with experiences backgrounds and identities similar to their own p usually y use ppanels to evaluate candidates at at least one stage g the issues of Since components p p are important p g to our who serves on the panel and how the ppanel operates It is clear according p and the input p of attorneys y and human resources administrators we spoke p to for the experience y that the more diverse the selection panel p study is the more diverse selectees will be all else q This is not necessarily y because individuals are overtlyy biased—we found few beingg equal p for selection are overtly y discriminating accusations and no evidence that anyy of those responsible g women minorities or any y other ggroup—but p because individuals by y nature tend to favor against applicants with experiences backgrounds and identities similar to their own We found in the study a common perception that selection processes—both the operations and more importantly the selection criteria—are not transparent Some participants perceive that not only are processes not transparent but they are not fair Although a significant majority of attorneys responded affirmatively when directly asked in interviews whether they perceive the hiring process to be fair with respect to both gender and race minorities 40% and women 36% were significantly more likely than whites 16% and men 19% to state that hiring is unfair with Internal Best Practice Documenting Hires For each lateral vacancy filled in the Antitrust Division the Section Chief or personnel officer fills out a worksheet detailing who was interviewed including their demographics and what the rationale for the selection was This step raises awareness of the mechanics of the selection process We found in the study y a common pperception p that selection pprocesses—both the operations p and more importantly p y the selection criteria—are not transparent p p Some pparticipants pperceive that t not only y are pprocesses not transparent p but they are nnot fair Although g a significant g majority j y of attorneys y responded p affirmatively y when directly y asked in interviews whether they perceive the hiring process too be b fairr with respect p to both ggender and race minorities 4 40% and women wo w e 36% 336% we were we e ssignificantly g ca t y more o e likely e y tthan a w whites te 16% 19% 1 16% and men 1 19% to state that hiring is unfair with IInternal nternal n r l Best e Prac Practice tice Documenting Hires For F or each lateral vacancyy ffilled in the Antitrust Division the Section Chieff or ppersonnel officer ffills out a worksheet detailing g who was g their demographics g p interviewed including and what the rationale ffor the selection was This stepp raises awareness of the mechanics of the selection process p ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 54 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 54 respect to race There was no significant difference either between men and women or whites and minorities in the percentage who believe that hiring is fair with respect to gender respect p to race There was no significant g difference either between men and women or whites and minorities in the percentage who believe that hiring is fair with respect to gender Most component HR administrators stated that hiring managers take gender and race into account when making hiring decisions e g by using gender and race as “tiebreakers” to make a selection between essentially equivalent candidates There is also some sentiment among attorneys particularly though not exclusively white males that the Department’s focus on diversity in hiring is lowering standards for selection HR administrators stated that hiringg managers Most component p g take ggender and race into account when makingg hiringg decisions e g g byy usingg gender g “t to make a and race as “tiebreakers” selection between essentially y equivalent q candidates There is also some sentiment amongg attorneys y particularly p y though g not exclusivelyy white males that the Department’s focus on diversity in hiring is lowering standards for selection 3 2 7 3 Performance appraisal 3 2 7 3 Performance appraisal We sought to also evaluate DOJ’s performance appraisal systems to determine attorneys’ perceptions of them and whether they have any likely effect on diversity outcomes We arrived at three related findings in this area We sought to also evaluate DOJ’s DOJ s performance appraisal systems to determine attorneys’ attorneys pperceptions p of them and whether they have any likely effect on diversity outcomes We arrived at three related findings in this area First the Department does not have an effective performance evaluation system Virtually all components use a binary i e “pass” “fail” evaluation system This system is not conducive to meaningful performance evaluation Moreover components have not promulgated objective performance criteria although with a binary system it would be impossible to construct them anyway In fact components report switching to this system recently in response to a memorandum from the previous Attorney General allowing the switch to make it simpler for managers Through this and other results it is apparent that management does not take evaluating employee performance seriously First the Department p y Virtually y all does not have an effective pperformance evaluation system components p use a binary y i e “pass” “fail” p evaluation system y This system y is not conducive to meaningful g pperformance evaluation Moreover components p have not ppromulgated g objective j pperformance criteria although g with a binary y system y it would be impossible p to construct them anyway y y In fact components p report p switching g to this system y recently y in response p to a memorandum from the previous p p for Attorneyy General allowingg the switch to make it simpler managers g Through g this and other results it is apparent that management does not take evaluating employee performance seriously Second attorneys perceive a lack of transparency in evaluation processes This perception frustrates attorneys because they do not know what the performance standards to which they should aspire are It leaves managers vulnerable to accusations that promotion award and other decisions are arbitrary and or unfair Second attorneys y pperceive a lack of transparency p y in evaluation pprocesses This pperception p frustrates attorneys y because they y do not know what the pperformance standards to which they y should aspire p are It leaves managers g vulnerable to accusations that promotion award and other decisions are arbitrary and or unfair Third attorneys reported receiving performance appraisals at a solid but less-than-ideal rate In the survey 77% of respondents indicated that they have annual reviews with their supervisors This is a respectable figure but inadequate for a professional organization which has a stated policy to do annual reviews 22 There were also statistically significantly different results for men and women—82% of men reported that they have regular reviews compared to 72% of women—and for whites and minorities—76% of whites reported that they have regular reviews compared to 83% of minorities Third attorneys y reported p receivingg performance p appraisals pp at a solid but less-than-ideal rate In the survey 77% of respondents indicated that they y have annual reviews with their supervisors supervisors This is a respectable p figure g but inadequate q for a pprofessional organization g which has a stated 22 ppolicy y to do annual reviews There were also statisticallyy significantly g y different results for men that theyy have regular reviews compared and women—82% of men reported p g p to 72% of women—and for whites and minorities—76% of whites reported that they have regular reviews compared to 83% of minorities Additionally the following figure shows results from the survey question asking whether attorneys receive good feedback from management Additionally y the following g figure g shows results from the survey question asking whether attorneys receive good feedback from management 22 In our experience percentages in the 90s are easily attainable 22 In n our experience percentages in the 90s are easily attainable ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 55 Figure 3 2 7 1 Performance feedback survey responses ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING Q14 My immediate supervisor gives me candid feedback Q14 My y iimmediate mmediate superv mm supervisor r isor gives m me candid feedback Q14 My y iimmediate mmediate superv mm supervisor r isor gives m me candid feedback Minorities Women Minorities Women Whites Men Whites Men 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% PAGE 55 Figure 3 2 7 1 Performance feedback survey responses Q14 My immediate supervisor gives me candid feedback 0% JUNE 14 2002 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Some components conduct evaluations semi-annually and others annually All of the Litigating Divisions U S Trustees and INS recently switched from a five-point to a “pass” “fail” evaluation system The Executive Office for Immigration Review uses a three-point scale “outstanding” “fully successful” “unacceptable” Only the Bureau of Prisons has maintained a five-step system largely because that is what it uses for non-attorneys and it wishes the policy to be consistent Each U S Attorney’s Office devises its own system 23 Some components p conduct evaluations semi-annually y and others annually y All of the Litigating p to a “pass” “fail” p Divisions U S Trustees and INS recentlyy switched from a five-point y g p scale evaluation system The Executive Office for Immigration Review uses a three-point “outstanding” “fully g y successful” “unacceptable” p Onlyy the Bureau of Prisons has maintained a five-stepp system y largely g y because that is what it uses for non-attorneys ney y and it wishes the policy to 23 be consistent Each U S Attorney’s Office devises its own system m Each component cited the same reason for the switch to the two-point system and BOP cites the same reason in desiring to switch —the perceived cumbersomeness of a five-point system especially in light of the perceived excellent performance of virtually all attorneys Each component reported that virtually all attorneys scored one of the top two ratings and undue staff energy was spent negotiating whether one was “excellent” or “outstanding ” ac component co po e t cited c ted the t e same sa e reason easo for o the t e switch sw tc to the t e two-point two po t syste system a and d BOP O ccites te the Each same reason in desiring g to switch —the perceived p cumbersomeness of a five-point p system y p y in light g of the perceived p y Each especially excellent pperformance of virtuallyy all attorneys p p y scored one of the top p two ratings and undue staff component reported that virtuallyy all attorneys energy was spent negotiating whether one was “excellent” or “outstanding ” We believe that the “pass” “fail” evaluation system does not serve the interests of the Department nor of diversity This is especially true considering that components reported making the switch merely for the purpose of expediency Near-unanimous input from components suggested that use of the “pass” “fail” system is a symptom that managers and staff attorneys tend not to take the performance evaluation process seriously in general It was reported common for attorneys not to receive an annual evaluation “p “pass” “ p “fail” evaluation system y We believe that the “pass” “fail” does not serve the interests of the p nor of diversity y This is especially p y true consideringg that components p reported p Department g the switch merely y for the ppurpose p off expediency p y Near-unanimous input p from making pass fail system is a symptom that managers and staff components suggested that use of the “pass” “fail” y tend not to take the pperformance evaluation pprocess seriously in general It was attorneys reported common for attorneys not to receive an annual evaluation It is certainly a management challenge to conduct candid thoughtful discussions about performance with each staff member at least once a year—but this feedback is an important part of professionals’ career development The lack of any real performance evaluation process in most components is symptomatic of the deficits in human resources management quality and attention to career development from which the Department suffers—and which is a theme throughout this report g challenge g to conduct candid thoughtful g discussions about It is certainlyy a management p with each staff member at least once a yyear—but this feedback is an important p ppart performance p The lack of any y real pperformance evaluation pprocess in of pprofessionals’ career development p y p g qquality y and most components is symptomatic of the deficits in human resources management attention to career development from which the Department suffers—and which is a theme throughout this report Furthermore absent objective realistic performance evaluations components expose themselves to charges that personnel decisions—such as promotions and awards—are arbitrary or discriminatory and adversely impact women or minorities In the study attorneys and HR j realistic performance p evaluations components p expose p themselves Furthermore absent objective g that personnel p p to charges decisions—such as promotions and awards—are arbitraryy or discriminatory and adversely impact women or minorities In the study attorneys and HR 23 We did not gather data on the systems used in each of the 94 Districts 2233 We did not gather data on the systems used in each of the 94 Districts Districts ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 56 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 56 managers especially minority attorneys expressed a perception that the system is not transparent—although they might perceive it as not transparent when the real problem is that there is no system at all managers g especially p y minority y attorneys y expressed p a pperception p that the system y is not transparent—although p g they might perceive it as not transparent when the real problem is that there is no system at all 3 2 7 4 Promotion 3 2 7 4 Promotion Promotion is one of the core career milestones—and HR systems—that leads to positive individual and organizational outcomes We discuss the promotion process and attorneys’ perceptions of it in this section Promotion is one of the core career milestones—and HR systems—that y leads to ppositive individual and organizational g outcomes We discuss the promotion process and attorneys’ perceptions of it in this section There are two career advancement outcomes in DOJ which constitute a promotion There are two career advancement outcomes in DOJ which constitute a promotion § § movement from one grade to the next within essentially the same job and movement to a higher job title either with or without a grade increase § § movement from one ggrade to the next within essentially y the same jjob and movement to a higher job title eitherr with or without a grade increase Movement from one step to another within the same grade known as quality step increase is considered a merit award as opposed to a promotion and is discussed in section 3 2 7 6 Movement by a DOJ attorney to a career SES position is also a promotion for the employee However—because unlike non-SES attorney positions SES attorney positions are not exempt from OPM selection rules and thus must undergo a full competition—movement to an SES position is more like applying for a new job than a promotion Movement from one stepp to another within the same ggrade known as qquality y step p increase is considered a merit award as opposed pp to a ppromotion and is discussed in section 3 2 7 6 Movement byy a DOJ attorney y to a career SES pposition is also a ppromotion for the employee p y However—because unlike non-SES attorney y ppositions SES attorney y ppositions are not exempt from OPM selection rules and thus must undergo g a full competition—movement p to an SES position is more like applying for a new job than a promotion Promotion processes vary by component The Section Chief or the equivalent has broad discretion in granting promotions with approval required by at least the Deputy Assistant Attorney General in most cases Some components or sections use panels of managers from across the component to evaluate promotions—and not surprisingly sections with broad-based hiring committees tend to have broad-based promotion committees as well Promotion processes p p the equivalent q has broad varyy byy component The Section Chief or discretion in ggranting g ppromotions with approval pp required q by y at least the Deputy p y Assistant Attorneyy General in most cases Some components p or sections use ppanels of managers g from across the component p to evaluate ppromotions—and d not surprisingly p g y sec tions with broad-based sections hiring committees tend to have broad-based promotion committees as well However despite the relatively elaborate processes that many components describe the prevailing HRM practice in the Department is for promotions to be based on longevity and to occur automatically as soon as employees are eligible—especially for the lower levels For promotion to the highest eligible level—GS-14 or GS-15 depending upon the attorney’s component and location—some components subject the promotion to slightly more scrutiny However despite p the relatively y elaborate pprocesses that manyy components p describe the pprevailing g HRM practice p in the Department p is for ppromotions to be based on longevity g y and to occur automaticallyy as soon as employees p y are eligible—especially g p y for the lower levels For ppromotion to the highest g g p g upon p the attorney’s y eligible level—GS-14 or GS-15 depending component and location—some components subject the promotion to slightly more scrutiny In the Litigating Divisions all attorneys have promotion potential to GS-15 and most make it at or near the time they become eligible In fact because all time-in-grade requirements are only guidelines and exceptions can be made many make it before their nominal time-in-grade eligibility Honors Program attorneys start at GS-11 or GS-12 occasionally an Honors Program attorney with advanced qualifications such a law clerkship will also start at grade 13 those who start at grade 11 are eligible for promotion to grade 12 in six months or less and those at grade 12 are eligible to be promoted to grade 13 in six to twelve months Lateral attorneys start at grades 13 14 or 15 Attorneys are eligible for promotion to grade 14 after twelve to 18 months and to grade 15 after twelve to 24 months In the Litigating g g Divisions all attorneys y have ppromotion potential p to GS-15 and most make it at or near the time they y become eligible g In fact because all time-in-grade g requirements q are only gguidelines and exceptions p can be made manyy make it before their nominal time-in-grade g eligibility g y Honors Program g attorneys y start at GS-11 or GS-12 occasionally y an Honors Program g attorneyy with advanced qqualifications such a law clerkship p will also start at ggrade 13 those who start at ggrade 11 are eligible g for ppromotion to ggrade 12 in six months or less and those at ggrade 12 are eligible g to be ppromoted to ggrade 13 in six to twelve months Lateral attorneys y start at ggrades 13 14 or 15 Attorneys y are eligible g for ppromotion to grade 14 after twelve to 18 months and to grade 15 after twelve to 24 months In the INS headquarters attorneys have promotion potential to grade 15 and non-supervisory field attorneys to grade 14 and most progress to their potential similarly to attorneys in the In the INS headquarters q attorneys y have ppromotion ppotential to ggrade 15 and non-supervisory p field attorneys to grade 14 and most progress to their potential similarly to attorneys in the ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 57 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 57 Litigating Divisions The Bureau of Prisons recently raised the promotion potential for nonsupervisory field attorneys to GS-14 and most progress to that level EOIR and U S Trustees attorneys also have promotion potential to grade 15 and most progress to that level Litigating g g Divisions The Bureau of Prisons recentlyy raised th thee ppromotion ppotential for nonsupervisory p y field attorn eys y to GS-14 and most pprogress g to that level EOIR and U S Trustees attorneys attorneys also have promotion potential to grade 15 and most progress to that level U S Attorneys’ Offices are on the Administratively Determined pay plan Non-supervisory attorneys are in grades 20 through 29 and most get promoted to grade 29 quickly Supervisory attorneys are in grades 19-10 or 9-1 in descending numerical order of rank depending on the jurisdiction and most achieve the highest grade used in their office U S Attorneys are at grade AD-0 AD salaries are comparable to but slightly higher than GS salaries 24 U S Attorneys’ Attorn r eys’ y Offices Off ffices are on the Administrativelyy Determinedd pa ppay y pl pplan an Non-superv p r isoryy Non-supervisory attorneys y are in ggrades 20 through g 29 and most gget ppromoted to ggrade 29 qquickly y Supervisory p y attorneys y are in ggrades 19-10 or 9-1 in descendingg numerical order of rank depending p g on the jjurisdiction and most achieve the highest g ggrade used d in their offic e U S Attorneys are at grade office AD-0 AD salaries are comparable to butt slig htlyy hig her than GS salaries slightly higher salaries 24 For accession to SES components are governed by OPM rules A committee consisting of current SES attorneys within the component evaluates candidates and the head of the component Assistant Attorney General or the equivalent makes the final decision For accession to SES components p are ggoverned byy OPM rules A committee consisting of current SES attorneys y within the component p evaluates candidates and the head of the component Assistant Attorneyy General General or the equivalent makes the final decision Components especially the Litigating Divisions and U S Attorneys’ Offices reported that labor market pressures have required them to provide rapid promotions and salary increases for attorneys The level GS-15 step 10 the highest level below SES carries a salary approximately equal to the salaries of attorneys starting out of law school at the top firms in many U S cities that labor Components p especially p y the the Litigating g g Divisions and U S Attorneys’ y Offices reported p market ppressures have required q them to pprovide rapid p promotions p and salaryy inc reases for increases attorneys y The level GS-15 stepp 10 the highest g y approximately pp level below SES carries a salary equal to the salaries of attorneys starting out of law school at the top firms in manyy U S cities Our findings regarding promotions mirror those for selection Our findings regarding promotions mirror those for selection § § § § Internal Best Practice When asked in interviews the majority of attorneys responded that they believe that Making the Case for a Promotion promotions are fair with respect to gender and race There is no significant difference in demographic In the Civil Division Commercial Litigation Branch attorneys who wish to be promoted groups’ perceptions about the fairness of write a memo making their case They then promotions with respect to gender Overall 77% collaborate with the branch director and deputy of attorneys said that the promotion process is fair on the product and present it to the Deputy with respect to gender Assistant Attorney General for approval This However both women 60% and minorities 53% process values individual merit and encourages a focus on performance were significantly less likely to report that they perceive the promotion process to be fair with respect to race than men 81% and whites 87% Note that this percentage of women and minorities which expressed this perception—barely a majority in the case of minorities—is lower than that which expressed the view that hiring is fair with respect to race Both the perception among attorneys and the reality is that criteria and processes for promotion are not transparent We find this perception bolstered by most components’ use of a “pass” “fail” performance evaluation system see section 3 2 7 3 and a lack of substantial performance reviews in general As a result attorneys are not equipped to be cognizant of their standing as a precursor to promotion 24 Over the years the Department has discussed moving all attorneys to the AD pay plan to allow salaries to be higher In the past the ability of AD attorneys to progress to the highest salary ranger faster than the actual salary at that range has been cited as the main advantage of AD however the Department’s recent practice of accelerating promotions to GS-15 have made this less of an advantage § IInternal Inte rrnal Be Best est Prac Practice tice When asked in interviews the majority j y of attorneys y responded p that theyy believe that Making the Case for a Promotion ppromotions are fair with respect p to ggender and race § There is no significant difference in demographic I the Civil Division Commercial Litigation In g Branch attorneys y who wish to be promoted p g p pperceptions p groups’ about the fairness of a memo making g th eir They y then write their case Overall 77% p p to ggender O promotions with respect l w ith the branch director and deputy collaborate with of atto aattorneys ttorney r eyss sa said d tthat at the t promotion process is fair of t pproductt aand nd present p t it to the the Deputy Deput ep ty on the p to ggender with respect Assistant i Attorney Attorneyy General fforr approval approval pp This However both womenn 60% 660% and minorities 5 53% pprocess values individuall meritt and eencourages § H 53% ncourages per erfr orm ormance r ance a ffocus on pef g y less like ly y to report p tha were significantly likely thatt theyy p the ppromotion pprocess to be ffair fair with perceive p t to rrace ace than men 8 81% and whites 87% Note thatt this percentage p g of respect 81% p p p y a majority j y in the case women and minorities which expressed this perception—barely of minorities—is lowerr than than that which expressed the view that hiringg is fair fair with respect p t tto o race p p y and the realityy is is that criteria and processes p for § Both the perception amongg attorneys ppromotion are not transparent p We find this pperception p bolstered byy most components’ p p p evaluation system y see section use of a “pass” “fail” performance 3 2 7 3 and a lack of substantial performance p g reviews in general As a result attorneys y are not equipped to be cognizant of their standing as a precursor to promotion 24 Over the yyears the Department p has discussed movingg all attorneys y to the AD ppayy pplan to allo allow w salaries to be higher g p the abilityy of AD attorn eys y to progress p g g y ra nger g faster than the actual attorneys to the highest salary ranger In the past salaryy at that that range g has been cited as the main advantage g of AD however the Department’s recent practice of accelerating promotions to GS-15 have made this less of an advantage ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE § KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 58 The composition of the pool of decision makers for promotions has an important impact on who gets promoted In fact participants in interviews and focus groups cited that in components with a significant number of women or minorities in supervisory positions particularly the Civil Rights Division and Bureau of Prisons it is easier for additional women and minorities to be promoted The concept of “critical mass” in the supervisory ranks again is important and self-perpetuating ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE § KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 58 The composition p of the pool p of decision makers for ppromotions has an important p impact p on who ggets ppromoted In fact pparticipants r p in interviews and focus ggroups with a significant cited that in components p g f number of women or minorities in supervisory p y positions p particularly p y the Civil Rights g Division and Bureau of Prisons it is easier for additional women and minorities to be ppromoted The concept p of “critical mass” in the supervisory ranks again is important and self-perpetuating We also found two additional widespread views with respect to promotion First many attorneys said that they do not want to be supervisors at the GS-15 Assistant-Chief-type level and even the SES level They would rather litigate than manage and perceive the duties of a supervisor to be undesirable Although SES membership carries significantly higher status and salary—47% to 57% greater than a GS-15 step 1 salary and 13% to 21% greater than a GS-15 step 10 salary not including locality pay —than lower grades many attorneys expressed that they were not interested in such positions Most often cited were the pressures bureaucratic duties burden of applying and lack of real legal practice that characterizes the typical SES attorney’s job This is somewhat ironic because as we have stated many attorneys also complain that the best litigators and not the best leaders become SES attorneys GS-15 supervisory positions contain some of the same characteristics—although far fewer than SES positions—but at a salary not even higher than a GS-15 non-supervisory position We also found two additional widespread p views with respect p to ppromotion First many y attorneys y said that theyy do not want to be supervisors p att the GS-15 Assistant-Chief-type yp level and even the SES level They y would rather litigate g than manage g and perceive p the duties of a supervisor p to be undesirable Although g SES membership p carries significantly g y higher g status and salary—47% y to 57% ggreater than a GS-15 step p 1 salary y and 13% to 21% ggreater than a GS-15 step p 10 salary y n nott includingg localityy pay —than p y g manyy attorneys y expressed p y were not not lower grades that they interested in such positions p p bureaucratic duties burden of Most often cited were the pressures applying pp y g and lack of real legal g ppractice that characterizes the typical yp SES attorney’s y jjob This is somewhat ironic because as we have stated manyy attorneys y also complain p that the best litigators g and not the best leaders become SES attorneys y GS-15 supervisory p y ppositions contain some of the same characteristics—although g far fewer than SES positions—but at a salary not even higher than a GS-15 non-supervisory position Second most attorneys—especially minorities—said that they do not find aspiration to an SES position to be a reasonable goal This is because of a pervasive sentiment among Department attorneys especially among minorities that they have no chance of achieving an SES position— due to the scarcity of positions and low turnover therein The majority of line attorneys senior leaders and HR administrators believe that the prospect of obtaining an SES position is too remote to be viable as a rationale for retention for most attorneys Minorities express this concern more than whites—and we believe that the lack of minorities in the SES ranks significantly contributes to minorities’ perceptions Second most attorneys—especially y p y minorities—said d that they y do not find aspiration p to an SES pposition to be a reasonable ggoal This is because of a ppervasive sentiment among g Department p attorneys y especially p y among g minorities that they y have no chance of achieving g an SES pposition— due to the scarcityy of ppositions and low turnover therein The majority j y of line attorneys y senior leaders and HR administrators believe that the prospect p p of obtainingg an SES position p is too remote to be viable as a rationale for retention for most attorneys y Minorities express p this concern more than whites—and we believe that the lack of minorities in the SES ranks significantly contributes to minorities’ perceptions It is clear that many attorneys simply do not want to do what an SES attorney does for his her job However it is also likely that part of individuals’ rationalization that they do not want the job is due to a belief that they will never get it anyway It is clear that many y attorneys y simply p y do not want a to do what an SES attorneyy does for his her jjob However it is also likely y that ppart of individuals’ rationalization that they do not want the job is due to a belief that they will never get it anyway Most senior managers in the Department cite attempts to get authorization from OPM and funding from Congress for more SES positions in their component Most report that both their workload warrants more positions and that additional SES positions would benefit staff morale performance and diversity by creating more opportunities Although obtaining more SES attorney positions would carry those benefits it would also have disadvantages such as potentially adding unnecessary levels of hierarchy further insulating the front lines of the Department from the political leadership and increasing costs and we are not convinced that more positions in and of themselves would solve the significant diversity issues surrounding the SES workforce In our recommendations section we describe a series of suggestions to address these issues Most senior managers g in the Department p cite attempts p to get g authorization from OPM and funding g f from m Congress g for more SES positions p in their component p Most report p that both their workload warrants more ppositions and that additional SES positions p would benefit staff morale pperformance and diversity y by y creating g more opportunities pp Although g obtaining g more SES attorneyy positions p g such would carryy those benefits it would also have disadvantages as ppotentially y addingg unnecessaryy levels of hierarchy y further insulatingg the front lines of the Department epa t e t from o the t e political po t ca leadership eade s p and a d increasing c eas g costs and a d we are a e not ot convinced co v ced that t at more ppositions in and of themselves would solve the significant g diversity y issues surrounding g the SES S S wo workforce o In our recommendations section we describe a series of suggestions to address these issues ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 59 3 2 7 5 Career development ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 59 3 2 7 5 Career development We define career development as those formal and informal HRM practices that occur throughout an individual’s career to improve his her abilities skills and perspective on the organization such that the individual participates in and leads increasingly broad elements of the organization’s mission at increasing levels of capability and personal gratification We define career development p as those formal and informal HRM practices p that occur throughout g an individual’s career to improve p his her abilities skills and pperspective p on the organization g p p g y broad elements of the such that the individual participates in and leads increasingly organization’s mission at increasing levels of capability and personal gratification Career development activities are important precursors to positive individual and organizational outcomes We identified four related aspects of employee career development that are important for the Department Career development p activities are important p pprecursors to positive p g individual and organizational outcomes We identified four related aspects of employee career development that are important for the Department § § § § career development that equips employees with the technical skills they need for their day-to-day jobs career development which employees intrinsically value as a positive aspect of their jobs career development that the Department relies upon to build a workforce of future leaders and case assignment which is a particularly important aspect of career development DOJ faces diversity-related issues in the latter three of these areas § § § § p career development that equips employees with the technical skills they need for their y y jobs j day-to-day career development which employees intrinsically value as a positive aspect of their j jobs career development that the Department relies upon to build a workforce of future leaders and case assignment which is a particularly important aspect of career development DOJ faces diversity-related issues in the latter three of these areas Career development for technical skill improvement Career development for technical skill improvement The most basic purpose for career development is to assure that attorneys have the skills that they need for their legal work The most basic purpose p p for career development is to assure that attorneys have the skills that they need for their legal work Employee training either in a classroom or on the job is a significant tool to achieve this end Training also serves the goal of improving employee morale and empowerment orienting employees to their environment and giving employees a broader perspective on their organization Employee p y training g either in a classroom or on the jjob is a tool to achieve this end Trainingg also serves the significant g ggoal of improving p g employee p y morale and empowerment p orientingg employees p y to their environment and ggiving g employees a broader perspective on their organization The National Advocacy Center operated by the Executive Office for U S Attorneys is cited throughout the Department as a key asset to DOJ Its technical courses— which are available to all components—and facilities are praised as valuable in meeting some training needs although some complain that course offerings are not sufficient and that the center is too remotely located Training opportunities and requirements vary significantly by component The Tax and Environment and Natural Resources Divisions each offer a one-week orientation to all new attorneys The Criminal Division offers orientation as well as a variety of training opportunities open to—and the same for—everyone The Civil Rights Division offers a Internal Best Practice Emphasizing Professional Development The INS recently created the position of Chief of Training and Career Development in the General Counsel’s office and staffed the position with a former District Counsel The office takes a birds-eye view of training from the GC’s office mitigating the concern that attorneys in the District offices weren’t getting enough access to training because of short-term workload concerns The office doesn’t give District Counsel absolute veto power over attorneys’ training activities so attorneys are able to enhance their professional development more than before In fact attorneys are encouraged to take courses in areas such as immigration document authentication that are not directly related to their day-to-day tasks but rather enhance their broad understanding of their field The National N Advocacy y Center operated p by y the Executive Office for U S Attorneys y is cited throughout g the as a key Department p y asset to DOJ Its technical courses— which are available to all components—and p facilities are ppraised as valuable in meeting g some training g needs although thatt course offerings a although gh some complain p g are not sufficient and that the center is too remotely located Training g opportunities pp and requirements q vary y significantly g The Tax and Environment and Natural by y component p Resources Divisions each offer a one-week orientation to all new attorneys y The Criminal Division offers orientation as well as a varietyy of training g opportunities pp open p to—and the same for—everyone The Civil Rights Division offers a IInternal Inte rrnal Be Best est Prac Practice tice p g Professional Emphasizing Development The INS recentlyy created the pposition off Chief off Training g and Career Development p in the General Counsel’s office ff and staffed ff the position ppo osition with a fformer District Counsel The ff takes a birds-eye birds--eye y view off training g ffrom office ff mitigating g g the concern that the GC’s office y in the District offices ff weren’t getting g g attorneys g access to trainingg because off short-term enough ff doesn’t ggive workload concerns The office District Counsel absolute veto ppower over attorneys’ y trainingg activities so attorneys y are able to enhance their pprofessional f development more than before f f y are In fact attorneys encouraged g to take courses in areas such as immigration g document authentication that are not directlyy related to their day-to-day y y tasks but rather enhance their broad understanding of their field f ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 60 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 60 variety of training courses on civil rights issues No component reported mandating any training as a prerequisite to advancement varietyy of trainingg courses on civil rights issues No component reported mandating any training as a prerequisite to advancement When asked managers did not cite attorney skill deficits in their areas of legal practice as an obstacle to achieving the Department’s mission Nor did female or minority attorneys cite a perception that they do not have equal access to training Thus the Department seems to be succeeding in equipping its employees to do their technical work with a neutral at worst impact on diversity When asked managers g did not cite attorney y skill deficits in their areas of legal g practice p as an obstacle to achieving the Department Department’ss mission Nor did female or minority attorneys cite a p p q access to training g Thus the Department p seems to be perception that theyy do not have equal g in equipping its employees to do their technical work with a neutral at worst impact succeeding on diversity Career development for employee retention Career development for employee retention White-collar professionals consistently cite career development as one of the most important factors that they value in a job and reasons why they stay This is especially true in the case of DOJ because most attorneys are foregoing higher salaries to work in the Department and thus must derive other benefits from the job in order to feel positively about it In fact attorneys cite the interesting challenging work and associated learning and development experiences as the main advantage of DOJ over private law firms This natural career development of sorts is contrasted however with few affirmative efforts to develop attorneys’ careers that the Department makes p as one of the most important p White-collar pprofessionals consistentlyy cite career development y value in a jjob and reasons why y they y stay y This is especially p y true in the case of factors that they y are foregoing g g higher g p and thus DOJ because most attorneys salaries to work in the Department y about it In fact attorneys y ci cite must derive other benefits from the jjob in order to feel ppositively g challenging g g work and associated learningg and development p p the interesting experiences as the g of DOJ over pprivate law firms This natural career development p of sorts is main advantage contrasted however with few affirmative efforts to develop attorneys’ careers that the Department makes Findings on employee perceptions of career development were mixed In the survey 78% of respondents agreed that they are “knowledgeable about their career opportunities at DOJ” and 71% agreed that they have “opportunities for professional growth and development that are consistent with their abilities ” However focus groups and individual interviews revealed that employees perceive a dearth of career development opportunities and that this perception leads to attrition Because minorities and women leave at a higher rate than white males this fact has an impact on diversity g on employee p y pperceptions p of career development p were mixed In the survey y 78% of Findings p g y are “knowledgeable g pp respondents agreed that they about their career opportunities at DOJ” and g y have “opportunities pp p that are 71% agreed that they for pprofessional ggrowth and development abilities ” However focus groups g p and individual interviews revealed that consistent with their p y pperceive a dearth of career development p opportunities pp and that this pperception p leads employees to attrition Because minorities and women leave at a higher rate than white males this fact has an impact on diversity Positive career development could be effectuated through a number of means One particularly effective—yet difficult-to-implement—measure is employee mentoring as discussed in section 3 2 5 and the section on recommendations Some components have formal mentoring programs In addition to implementing a formal mentoring program from the top down the organization must foster an environment that recognizes the value of mentoring and encourages its senior supervisory and especially non-supervisory attorneys to seek it out The best way to achieve this is for the very top of the organization to lead by example 25 We find the Department lacking in this area among the common reasons cited is a workload that leaves no time os t ve career ca ee deve development op e t cou could d be eeffectuated ectuated through t oug a number u be oof means ea s O Onee pa particularly t cu a y Positive y difficult-to-implement—measure p is employee p y mentoring g as discussed in section effective—yet p have formal mentoring g pprograms g 3 2 5 and the section on recommendations Some components p g a formal mentoring g pprogram g from the top p down the organization g In addition to implementing g g its senior must foster an environment that recognizes the value of mentoringg and encourages p y and especially p y non-supervisory p y attorneys y to seek it out The best way y to achieve this supervisory p of the organization g to lead by y example p 25 We find the Department p lacking in is for the veryy top this area among the common reasons cited is a workload that leaves no time 25 A heavy prevalence of and reliance on mentoring can also have an adverse impact on the diversity climate if mentoring leads to cliques and preferential treatment If employees perceive that membership in exclusive cliques is a prerequisite to advancement or that mentors in positions of authority practice favoritism toward their mentees at the expense of others then a mentoring environment can have a negative effect As discussed in section 3 2 5 minority attorneys throughout DOJ cite this perception We believe that an environment of mentoring brings net positive results to an organization—and that it is a valuable tool for nurturing junior employees if implemented carefully 25 A heavy y pprevalence of and reliance on mentoring g can also have an adverse impact p on the diversity climate if mentoringg leads to cliques q and ppreferential treatment If employees p y pperceive that membership p in exclusive cliques q is a pprerequisite q to advancement or that mentors in positions p of authorityy practice p favoritism toward their mentees at the expense p of others then a mentoringg environment can have a negative g effect As discussed in section 3 2 5 minority y attorneys y throughout g DOJ cite this pperception p We believe that an environment of mentoring g brings g net ppositive results to an organization—and that it is a valuable tool for nurturing junior employees if implemented carefully ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 61 Career development for better management in the future ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 61 Career development for better management in the future Another important objective of career development—and the one in which we find DOJ to be most lacking—is to develop a corps of future leaders for the organization A common view among staff and senior managers whom we interviewed in the study was that the Department does not prepare attorneys to become managers—and this lack of preparation is reflected in the management style of Section Chiefs and other managers In this way the lack of career development perpetuates itself Another important p objective j of career development—and p the one in which we find DOJ to be most lacking—is g p of future leaders for the organization g to developp a corps A common view amongg staff and senior managers g whom we interviewed in the studyy was that the Department p does not prepare p p attorneys y to become managers—and g this lack of ppreparation p is reflected in the management g y of Section Chiefs and other managers In this way the lack of career style development perpetuates itself E E It is evident from the Department’s HRM processes why this is the case The best lawyers not the best leaders become the managers and these attorneys’ management skills are not cultivated along the way or reinforced when they arrive in management The cited results of this outcome are generally poor communication from management and the lack of transparency in HRM processes that we have cited throughout the study It is evident from the Department’s p p whyy this is the case The best lawyers y not HRM processes the best leaders become the managers g and these attorneys’ y management g skills are not cultivated along g the way y or reinforced when they y arrive in n management g The cited results of this outcome are ggenerally y ppoor communication from management g and the lack of transparency in HRM processes that we have cited throughout the study The adverse impact on the diversity of DOJ’s attorney workforce that inadequate career development brings is exacerbated by two factors previously cited The adverse impact p on the diversity y of DOJ’s attorney y workforce that inadequate career development brings is exacerbated by two factors previously cited § § the critical role in human resources management that these line supervisors such as Section Chiefs or local office heads play and the lack of gender and especially racial diversity in the ranks of these jobs One way to address this issue would be to implement a rigorous program of training for new managers but as we discuss in the section on recommendations a more effective way to address the issue is by gradually improving the responsibility levels of attorneys as they progress through the organization Case job assignment § § the critical role in human resources management g that these line supervisors such as Section Chiefs or local office heads pplay y and the lack of gender and especially racial diversity in the ranks of these jobs One wayy to address this issue would be to implement p g p g g for new a rigorous program of training managers g but as we discuss in the section on recommendations a more effective way y to address the issue is byy gradually g improving the responsibility levels of attorneys as they progress through the organization Case job assignment Components’ processes to assign cases to attorneys vary based on management practices and the nature of their cases Most components especially the Civil Division Environment and Natural Resources Division Criminal Divisions INS and U S Attorneys’ Offices expressed that they have an unwieldy workload that burdens attorneys Components’ p p g cases to attorneys y varyy based on management g ppractices and the processes to assign nature of their cases Most components p especially p y the Civil Division Environment and Natural Resources Division Criminal Divisions INS and U S Attorneys’ Offices expressed that they have an unwieldy workload that burdens attorneys In some components particularly INS BOP and U S Trustees cases are to some degree a commodity in these components assignments tend to be a rotation based on attorneys’ workloads In others such as the Criminal Division and criminal Sections of the Civil Rights and Environment and Natural Resources Divisions attorneys can find their own cases In others such as the Tax Division individual attorneys’ specialties are more important in assigning cases Within the Litigating Divisions some Sections focus on In some components p p y INS BOP and U S Trustees cases are to some degree g a particularly commodity y in these components p g y assignments tend to be a rotation based on attorneys’ workloads In others such as the Criminal Division and criminal Sections of the Civil Rights g and Environment and Natural Resources Divisions attorneys y can find their own cases In others such as the Tax Division individual attorneys’ y specialties p are more important in assigning cases Within the Litigating Divisions some Sections focus on Electronically deleted quote bo x Electronically deleted quote bo x ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 62 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 62 developing civil or criminal cases others in supporting litigation or case development others on defending the government and others on appellate litigation The nature of this type of work— in particular the lead times involved duration of cases role of the line attorneys resources required special technical skills needed and degree of teaming involved—leads to differences in the practice and implications of case assignment developing p g civil or criminal cases others in supporting pp g litigation g or case development p others on defendingg the ggovernment and others on appellate pp litigation g The nature of this type yp of work— in particular p the lead times involved duration of cases role of the line attorneys y resources required q special p technical skills needed and degree g of teaming involved—leads to differences in the practice and implications of case assignment Many components come across cases that have the potential to yield a great deal of exposure skill development and glory for the participating litigators Of course attorneys vie for placement on and leadership of these types of cases and pay a good deal of attention to the placement outcomes Thus case assignment is a critical part of individual outcomes with respect to job satisfaction success and diversity Most participants agreed that success on a major case can be a valuable career enhancer but few believe that any such event is a “rite of passage” or prerequisite to longterm success in their component Many y components p come across cases that have the ppotential to yield y a great g deal of exposure p skill development p and gglory y for the participating p p g litigators g y Of course attorneys vie for pplacement on and leadershipp of these types yp of cases and ppay y a ggood deal of attention to the pplacement outcomes Thus case assignment g is a critical ppart of individual outcomes outco es with w t respect espect to job satisfaction sat s act o success and a d y Most participants p p g j diversity agreed that success on a major case can be a valuable career enhancer but few believe that y such event is a “rite of ppassage” g or prerequisite to longany term success in their component Internal Best Practice Power to Select Cases In the Environment and Natural Resource Division Appellate Section cases are not assigned immediately when they come in Rather management waits until 20-30 cases come in and then Assistant Chiefs write a brief description of each one and send the whole list to every attorney in the Section Attorneys then write a proposal for any cases that they wish to take on and the Chief and assistants make the decision about who gets which cases Complaints about unfairness in case assignments have dropped considerably since this process was adopted IInternal In nternal r l Best e Prac Practice tice Power to Select Cases IInn the Environment and Natural Resource Division Appellate pp Section cases are not g assigned immediatelyy when theyy come in g waits until 20-30 cases R ather management f write a brieff come in and then Assistant Chiefs p off each one and send the whole list description S Attorneys y then to everyy attorneyy in the Section p ffor anyy cases that theyy wish to write a pproposal take on and the Chieff and assistants make the g which cases decision about who gets Complaints p about unfairness f in case assignments g have dropped pp considerably since this process was adopted We found that most components assign cases on a relatively top-down basis with the Section Chief or the equivalent mostly responsible In some sections the Assistant Chiefs play an important role as well Attorneys and minorities in particular cited a lack of transparency in case assignments As a result perceived inequity in case assignments was one of the main concerns repeatedly cited in focus groups by minority attorneys throughout the Department especially in the Litigating Divisions We found that most components p g cases on a relatively assign top-down p basis with the Section Chief or the equivalent q mostlyy responsible p In some sections the Assistant Chiefs pplayy an important p role as well Attorneys y and minorities in pparticular cited a lack of transparency p y in case assignments g As a result pperceived inequity q y in case assignments g was one of the main concerns repeatedly p y cited in focus ggroups by minority attorneys throughout the Department especially in the Litigating Divisions When asked directly in individual interviews about case assignment a significant majority— 73%—answered that cases are assigned fairly However there were statistically significant effects of both gender and race on answers to this question Women are less likely than men to believe there is fairness in case assignments by a margin of 62% versus 87% and minorities are less likely to believe that they receive fairness in case assignments compared to whites 60% versus 87% When asked directly y in individual interviews about case assignment g a significant g majority— j y 73%—answered that cases are assigned g fairly y However there were statistically y significant g effects of both ggender and race on answers to this qquestion Women are less likely y than men to believe there is fairness in case assignments g by y a margin g of 62% versus 87% and minorities are less likelyy to believe that they receive fairness in case assignments compared to whites 60% versus 87% Results were similar in the survey The following figure provides results by gender and race ethnicity for a survey question that asked about this issue Results were similar in the survey y The followingg figure g provides p results by gender and race ethnicity for a survey question that asked about this issue ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 63 Figure 3 2 7 2 Case assignment survey responses KPMG CONSULTING Women Minorities Women Whites Men Whites White t s Men 20% 40% 60% 80% PAGE 63 Q19 A As Assignment signment to the projects and jobs that off offers ffe rs y ge nder the best career development is influenced by gender Q19 A As Assignment signment to the projects and jobs that off offers ffe rs evelopment is influenced by y rrace ace the best careerr d development Minorities 0% JUNE 14 2002 Figure 3 2 7 2 Case assignment survey responses Q19 Assignment to the projects and jobs that offers the best career development is influenced by gender Q19 Assignment to the projects and jobs that offers the best career development is influenced by race ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 0% 20% 40% 60% It is very positive that a majority of all groups tested believe that assignments are fairly distributed However the Department should address the perception issue that leads to differences between race and gender groups—which we believe is attributable to the perceived lack of transparency of the assignment process Our recommendations section discusses ways to address the perception and if the inequity is a reality in addition to a perception to address that as well It is veryy ppositive that a majority j y of all groups g p tested believe that assignments g are fairly y should address the p distributed However the Department p perception p issue that leads to differences between race and g gender groups—which g p we believe is attributable to the p perceived lack of transparency p y of the assignment g pprocess Our recommendations section discusses ways y to address the perception and if the inequity is a reality in addition to a perception to address that as well Another survey question which asked whether “I feel that assignments I receive and management decisions about my career development have been made without regard to my race gender ethnic origin” was answered affirmatively by only 45% of minorities and 74% of whites 61% of women and 80% of men 26 Another surveyy qquestion which asked whether “II feel that assignments g I receive and decisions about my management g y career development p have been made without regard g to my y race gender ethnic ace ge de et c oorigin” g was aanswered swe ed aaffirmatively by only 45% of minorities and 74% of whites 61% of women and 80% of men n 26 In addition to the allocation of cases day-to-day most components provide other assignments— such as special projects task forces participation in recruiting or short-term details to the front office or another part of DOJ—which can be important career opportunities Some participants also cited inequity in the allocation of these opportunities although these were viewed as far less important to career development than routine case assignments in fact these assignments were not only not viewed as critical precursors to advancement but were not universally viewed with esteem at all In addition to the allocation of cases day-to-day y y most components p pprovide other assignments— g such as special projects task forces participation in recruiting or short-term short term details to the front office or another ppart of DOJ—which can be important p career opportunities pp Some p participants p aalso so cited c ted inequity equ ty in the t e allocation a ocat o of o these t ese opportunities oppo tu t es aalthough t oug tthese ese we weree vviewed ewed as far a less es important p to career development p than routine case assignments g in fact these assignments g were not only y not vi viewed as critical precursors to advancement a but were not universally viewed with esteem at all 3 2 7 6 Compensation awards and bonuses 3 2 7 6 Compensation awards and bonuses 80% As in other federal agencies hiring officials in DOJ have little discretion with respect to compensation per se The only flexibility that managers really have—given the pay plan grade and locality for a vacancy—is to set the step when they make an offer of employment Because of exemptions to OPM regulations about defining and filling attorney positions DOJ hiring officials also have more latitude than those in other federal agencies in which case a vacancy usually has a pre-defined grade or two-grade range associated with it as to which grade in which to place new hires As in other federal agencies g hiring g officials in DOJ have little discretion with respect p to compensation p pper se The onlyy flexibilityy that managers g really y have—given g the ppayy plan p grade g Because and localityy for a vacancy—is y to set the step p when theyy make an offer of employment p y of exemptions p to OPM regulations g about defining g and fillingg attorney y ppositions DOJ hiring g in officials also have more latitude than those in other federal agencies g which case a vacancy y grade or two-grade range associated with it as to which grade in which usually y has a pre-defined p to place new hires 26 This question was added to the survey after it was underway so the sample size is less but still statistically significant than the other questions 26 This qquestion was added to the survey y after it was underway so the sample size is less but still statistically significant than the other questions ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 64 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 64 Awards and bonuses are not a major part of the compensation structure in the federal government The most prevalent form of merit award is a quality step increase—i e an increase of a step within one’s GS grade that is accompanied by a base salary increase DOJ also gives annual cash bonuses generally of $1 000-$5 000 given at the discretion of the component front office Awards and bonuses are not a major j part p of the compensation p structure in the federal ggovernment The most prevalent p q y stepp increase—i e an increase form of merit award is a quality of a stepp within one’s GS ggrade that is accompanied p y increase DOJ also ggives byy a base salary annual cash bonuses generally of $1 000-$5 000 given at the discretion of the component front office We did not find widespread perceptions of unfairness in either starting grade or step or award allocation We did not find widespread perceptions of unfairness in either starting grade or step or award allocation 3 2 7 7 Summary of human resource systems findings This section discussed attorneys’ perceptions of DOJ HR systems as well as our assessments of their fairness and soundness Note that these analyses are independent of any actual outcomes of HR systems that are adverse to any group which are the subject of section 3 3 3 2 7 7 Summary of human resource systems findings This section discussed attorneys’ y pperceptions p off DOJ HR systems y as well as our assessments of their fairness and soundness Note that these analyses y are independent p of any y actual outcomes of HR systems that are adverse to any group which are the subject of section 3 3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 65 3 2 8 Summary of work climate findings A common pattern throughout the elements of work climate are that attorneys of different demographic groups characterize the work climate differently In particular women are less likely than men and minorities are less likely than whites to hold favorable views of the work climate To clearly illustrate the generality of this conclusion of the 51 separate measures of work climate included in the survey—of which there are 49 for which the measurement of favorable response can be viably compared by gender and race—gender made a statistically significant difference in responses on 34 of the measures 67% On each of 34 measures where gender made a significant difference it was women who had the lower percentage favorable response Similarly 38 of the items 74% show a statistically significant effect of the race of the attorney responding On 37 of the 38 measures where race made a difference it was minorities who had the lower percentage favorable response In the introduction to section 3 2 we discussed some of the subtle biases often present at organizations—which lead to less positive perceptions of the work climate among women and minorities It is impossible to know the extent to which any of these explanations may apply in DOJ’s case Nevertheless as the Department ponders the feedback from this study it is important to notice these inter-group differences as well as the total sample data As we discuss in the section on recommendations there are ways to address these differences through training as well as changes to HRM processes ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 65 3 2 8 Summary of work climate findings A common ppattern throughout g the elements of work climate are that attorneys y of different demographic g p ggroups p characterize the work climate differently y In pparticular women are less likelyy than men and minorities are less likely than whites to hold favorable views of the work climate To clearlyy illustrate the ggeneralityy of this conclusion of the 51 separate p measures of work climate included in the survey—of y which there are 49 for which the measurement of favorable response p can be viably y compared p by y ggender and race—gender g made a statistically y significant g difference in responses p On each of 34 measures where ggender on 34 of the measures 67% made a significant g p g favorable response p difference it was women who had the lower percentage Similarly y 38 of the items 74% show a statisticallyy significant g y effect of the race of the attorney responding p g On 37 of the 38 measures where race made a difference it was minorities who had the lower percentage favorable response In the introduction to section 3 2 we discussed some of the subtle biases often ppresent at organizations—which g lead to less ppositive perceptions p p of the work climate among g women and minorities It is impossible p p y apply in to know the extent to which anyy of these explanations may DOJ’s case Nevertheless as the Department p t pponders the feedback from this study y it is important p to notice these inter inter-group ggroup p differences as well as the total sample p data As we discuss in the section on recommendations there the are ways to address these differences through training as well as changes to HRM processes ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 66 3 3 Individual and organizational outcomes ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 66 3 3 Individual and organizational outcomes We define diversity in terms of organizational outcomes such as the representation of women and minorities in senior management jobs but as described in section 2 1 we also believe that it is important for DOJ to achieve parity between gender race and ethnicity groups in individual outcomes such as job satisfaction This section discusses these individual outcomes We define diversityy in terms of organizational g p outcomes such as the representation of women and minorities in senior management a g j but as described in section 2 1 we also believe that jobs it is important p for DOJ to achieve pparity y between ggender race and ethnicity y ggroups p in individual outcomes such as job satisfaction This section discusses these individual outcomes It also discusses organizational outcomes with respect to diversity including those resulting from tangible HRM practices that DOJ sought to evaluate through this study In the discussion of HR systems as part of the diversity climate section 3 2 7 we presented findings about the objective operation of these processes as well as attorneys’ perceptions of them In this section we present data results that describe the outputs of the processes It also discusses organizational g outcomes with respect p to diversity y including g those resulting g from tangible g HRM ppractices that DOJ sought g to evaluate through g this study y In the discussion of HR systems y p of the diversity y climate section 3 2 7 we ppresented findings g about the as part objective j operation p of these processes p as well as attorneys’ y pperceptions p of them In this section we present data results that describe the outputs of the processes 3 3 1 Job satisfaction 3 3 1 Job satisfaction We sought to assess whether men women whites and minorities all hold a comparable level of satisfaction with their current jobs We sought g to assess whether men women whites and minorities all hold a comparable level of satisfaction with their current jobs An affirmative finding would be important with respect to diversity A negative finding would be troubling—and difficult to correct An organization cannot manage job satisfaction per se Rather job satisfaction is an indirect outcome of other processes which DOJ can manage An affirmative finding g would be important p with respect p to diversity y A negative g finding g would be troubling—and g difficult to correct An organization g cannot manage g jjob satisfaction per p se Rather job satisfaction is an indirect outcome of other processes which DOJ can manage In light of the role that employee satisfaction plays—as a leading indicator of more tangible individual and organizational outcomes such as employee performance and retention—virtually any organization could benefit from regular assessments of employee attitudes and satisfaction DOJ conducts no such assessments In light g of the role that employee p y satisfaction pplays—as y g indicator of more tangible g a leading individual and organizational g p y pperformance and retention—virtually y outcomes such as employee anyy organization g could benefit from regular assessments of employee attitudes and satisfaction DOJ conducts no such assessments We asked about job satisfaction in the survey and in focus groups and interviews We found in all media that most employees feel that the Department of Justice is a good place to work However in the survey there were slight but statistically significant differences in responses between men and women as well as whites and minorities The following figure shows responses to this question We asked about jjob satisfaction in the surveyy and in focus ggroups p and interviews We found in all media that most employees p y p feel that the Department of Justice is a ggood pplace to work However in the survey y there were slight g but statistically y significant g differences in responses p between men and women as well as whites and minorities The following figure shows responses to this question Figure 3 3 1 1 Overall satisfaction survey responses Q24 Overall I am satisfied with my career at DOJ up to this time Figure 3 3 1 1 Overall satisfaction survey responses Q24 Overall I am satisfied with my career at DOJ up to this time Q24 Q Q2 24 Ov O Overall vera r ll I am ms satisfied atisf sfied w with ith th m my yc career are r err a att D DOJ OJ u up p tto o tthis his m time Q24 Q Q2 24 Ov O Overall vera r ll I am ms satisfied atisf sfied w with ith my my c career are r err a att D DOJ OJ u up p tto o tthis his time m Minorities Women norities no e Minorities Wo om me n en Whites Men Whites White tes Me en 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 0 40% 40% 40 60% 6% 60 80% 8 100% 100 00% 0% 20% 40% 60% 6 80% 80% 80 100% ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 67 3 3 2 Organizational identification ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 67 3 3 2 Organizational identification Organizational identification is the degree to which employees perceive their own values to be aligned with their employer’s and the degree of pride and loyalty that they feel for their employer Organizational g g to which employees p y pperceive their own values to be identification is the degree aligned g with their employer’s and the degree off pride and loyalty that they feel for their employer A classic question related to organizational identification is whether the respondent would recommend his her organization to a friend The following figure provides the results to this question A classic question q g p would related to organizational identification is whether the respondent recommend his her organization to a friend The following figure provides the results to this question Figure 3 3 2 Organizational identification survey responses Figure 3 3 2 Organizational identification survey responses Q6 I would recommend DOJ for employment to a good friend Q6 w ouldr d rrecommend ecommend nd DOJ ffor or empl m oy oyment nt tto o a good oa go df d ffriend riend d 6 I wo would employment Q6 I would recommend DOJ for employment for a good friend 6 I wo would employment for friend Q6 w ould re rrecommend ecommen nd DOJ ffor or e m oy mpl oyment n ffo or a good go ffr iend d Minorities Women Min norittie es inorities Wom men Whites Men Whites hiites Men 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Note that the figures are quite high for all groups The differences between men and women and whites and minorities are again small but statistically significant 0% 20% 20% 20 40% 60% 0 80% 8 100% 0 0% 20% 40% 60% 0 80% 80% 80 100% 100 00% Note that the figures g are qquite high g for all ggroups p The differences between men and women and whites and minorities are again small but statistically significant ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 68 3 3 3 Job involvement ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 68 3 3 3 Job involvement Job involvement is a measure of employees’ motivation and perception of ownership of their jobs This measure often captures the results i e is an outcome of their level of frustration with elements of the work culture Job involvement is a measure of employees’ p y motivation and pperception p of ownership p of their jjobs This measure often captures p the results i e is an outcome of their level of frustration with elements of the work culture The following figure presents the results of the survey’s job involvement element which is a composite of the results of several survey questions The following g figure g ppresents the results of the survey’s job involvement element which is a composite of the results of several survey questions Figure 3 3 3 1 Job involvement index results Figure 3 3 3 1 Job involvement index results Job involvement score based on composite survey results 1-4 scale Job involvemen involvement m ts score core based on composite survey r results 1-4 scale Job involvement score based on composite survey results 1-4 scale Job b iinvolvement nvolveme m nt score based on composite surv survey r ey results 1-4 scale Minorities Women Minorities Women Whites Men Whites Men 0 00 1 00 2 00 3 00 4 00 0 00 1 00 2 00 3 00 Women have statistically significantly lower scores than men and minorities have statistically significantly lower scores than whites These differences can be linked to the differences of perception of the work climate reported in earlier segments of this report 4 00 0 00 1 00 2 00 3 00 4 00 0 00 1 00 2 00 3 00 Women have statistically y significantly g y lower scores than men and minorities have statistically significantly g y lower scores than whites These differences can be linked to the differences of r perception of the work climate reported in earlier segments of this report 4 00 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 69 3 3 4 Recruiting We found that the Department’s recruiting practices are generally a strength in its efforts to build and retain a diverse attorney workforce This is evidently due in part to a perception in the attorney labor market that DOJ is an attractive place to work and in part to DOJ’s own practices as described in section 3 2 7 1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 69 3 3 4 Recruiting We found that the Department’s p g ppractices are ggenerally y a strength g in its efforts to build recruiting and retain a diverse attorneyy workforce This is evidentlyy due in ppart to a pperception p in the attorneyy labor market that DOJ is an attractive place to work and in part to DOJ’s own practices as described in section 3 2 7 1 According to data provided by OARM approximately 2 232 graduating lawyers applied through the Honors Program in 2001 Of these 31% were minorities and 58% were women compared with approximately 21% minority and slightly under 50% female enrollment in law schools in 2001 27 According to data provided by OARM approximately 2 232 graduating lawyers applied through the Honors Program in 2001 Of these 31% were minorities and 58% were women compared with approximately 21% minority and slightly under 50% female enrollment in law schools in 2001 27 Offers were made to 209 graduates for the Spring 2001 graduating class—of these 30% went to minorities and 60% to women These demographic breakdowns are comparable to those in the recent past The next section shows that the racial and gender breakdown of those hired—i e who accepted offers and eventually joined DOJ—were analogous so that the diversity yielded by the Honors Program carried all the way through the recruiting and hiring system Offers were made to 209 graduates for the Spring 2001 graduating class—of these 30% went to minorities and 60% to women These demographic breakdowns are comparable to those in the recent past The next section shows that the racial and gender breakdown of those hired—i e who accepted offers and eventually joined DOJ—were analogous so that the diversity yielded by the Honors Program carried all the way through the recruiting and hiring system 27 Figures are based on candidates whose race ethnicity is known Source of the figures for minority enrollment in law school is OARM source of the figures for female enrollment in law school is the American Bar Association 27 Figures are based on candidates whose race ethnicity is known Source of the figures for minority enrollment in law school is OARM source of the figures for female enrollment in law school is the American Bar Association ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 70 3 3 5 Hiring ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 70 3 3 5 Hiring In order to assess the outcomes—in terms of the racial ethnic and gender composition of the workforce—of the Department’s hiring processes we analyzed hiring figures based on data from the National Finance Center see a discussion of the NFC in section 2 2 28 p of the In order to assess the outcomes—in terms of the racial ethnic and ggender composition p g pprocesses we analyzed y hiring g figures g based on data from workforce—of the Department’s hiring 28 the National Finance Center see a discussion of the NFC in section 2 2 Hiring diversity Hiring diversity The following table shows the percentage of all hires and lateral hires in 2001 that were minorities as well as the percentage of the base attorney workforce that was minority for comparison29 The following table shows the percentage of all hires and lateral hires in 2001 that were minorities as well as the percentage of the base attorney workforce that was minority for comparison29 Table 3 3 5 1 Demographics of attorney base all hires and Honors Program hires 2001 Table 3 3 5 1 Demographics of attorney base all hires and Honors Program hires 2001 Group Base All hires Group Base All hires Men Women 63% 37% 60% 40% Honors Program hires 37% 63% Men Women 63% 37% 60% 40% Honors Program hires 37% 63% Whites Minorities 85% 15% 79% 21% 70% 30% Whites Minorities 85% 15% 79% 21% 70% 30% Note that the Department’s hiring served to make it more diverse last year with the effect greater for Honors Program hires than for laterals These patterns have held constant in recent history— over the last three years the Department’s attorney hires have been 42% women and 21% minorities—and across components—figures B 9 and B 10 in appendix B display the figures by component Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program Note that the Department’s p hiringg served to make it more diverse last year y with the effect greater g for Honors Program g hires than for laterals These ppatterns have held constant in recent history— over the last three years y the Department’s p attorneyy hires have been 42% women and 21% minorities—and across components—figures B 9 and B 10 in appendix B display the figures by component Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program Because components did not use LARP for all of their lateral hires during the program’s existence from 1997 to 2001 and some did not use the program at all we do not have sufficient data to isolate the program’s impact on the diversity of lateral hires The only data available about the diversity of all lateral hires during the period shows that there was no difference between the racial and gender diversity of lateral attorneys hired in 1997-2001 and those hired in before LARP Because components p g did not use LARP for all of their lateral hires duringg the pprogram’s existence from 1997 to 2001 and some did not use the pprogram g at all we do not have sufficient data to isolate the pprogram’s g impact p on the diversity y of lateral hires The only y data available about the diversityy of all lateral hires duringg the period p shows that there was no difference between the racial and gender diversity of lateral attorneys hired in 1997-2001 and those hired in before LARP Perhaps the fact that some components express satisfaction with the program—because of its effects on both the quality and the diversity of the lateral pool—is a more useful evaluative tool for LARP than are the data Perhaps p the fact that some components p express p satisfaction with the pprogram—because g of its effects on both the quality q y and the diversity of the lateral pool—is a more useful evaluative tool for LARP than are the data 28 We used individuals’ personnel records to ascertain start dates There are various different record categories—such as movement from DOJ to other agencies and vice-versa exiting and re-entry into the workforce and temporary or provisional appointments—which make ascertaining attorneys’ true start date difficult in some cases according to the JMD Finance Staff Moreover categories are used differently at different times 29 Personnel records do not distinguish between lateral hires and Honors Program hires so we assumed that attorneys with a start grade of GS-13 or higher were lateral hires All attorneys in U S Attorneys’ Offices are assumed to be lateral hires Workforce base is defined as the population on December 31 2000 28 We used u individuals’ ppersonnel records to ascertain start dates There are various different record categories—such g as movement from DOJ to other agencies g and vice-versa exiting g and re-entry y into the workforce and temporary p y or provisional p appointments—which pp make ascertainingg attorneys’ y true start date difficult in some cases according to the JMD Finance Staff Moreover categories are used differently at different times 29 Personnel records do not distinguish between lateral hires and Honors Program hires so we assumed that attorneys with a start grade of GS-13 or higher were lateral hires All attorneys in U S Attorneys’ Offices are assumed to be lateral hires Workforce base is defined as the population on December 31 2000 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 71 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 71 Starting grades Starting grades The following figures compare the average starting grade of all attorneys both Honors Program and lateral hires by demographic They do not control for background prior to being hired at DOJ Results are presented for all GS attorneys and all AD non-supervisory attorneys30 The following figures compare the average starting grade of all attorneys both Honors Program and lateral hires by demographic They do not control for background prior to being hired at DOJ Results are presented for all GS attorneys and all AD non-supervisory attorneys30 30 effects 30 Data are for all attorneys hired in calendar years 1997-2001 Data for year 2001 alone show analogous effects Data are for all attorneys hired in calendar years 1997-2001 Data for year 2001 alone show analogous ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 72 15 15 14 14 13 12 11 Grade KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 72 Figure 3 3 5 2 Average starting grade GS attorneys 1997-2001 Average start grade Average start grade Figure 3 3 5 2 Average starting grade GS attorneys 1997-2001 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 13 12 Minority White Female Male 12 8 13 2 12 9 13 3 Demographic group 11 Grade Minority White Female Male 12 8 13 2 12 9 13 3 Demographic group ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 73 29 29 28 28 27 27 26 26 25 24 PAGE 73 24 23 22 22 21 21 20 JUNE 14 2002 25 23 Grade KPMG CONSULTING Figure 3 3 5 3 Average starting grade AD attorneys 1997-2001 Average start grade Average start grade Figure 3 3 5 3 Average starting grade AD attorneys 1997-2001 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Minority White Female Male 24 4 24 9 24 4 25 0 Demographic group 20 Grade Minority White Female Male 24 4 24 9 24 4 25 0 Demographic group ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 74 There exist notable differences between groups In the GS ranks whites start on average at 0 4 grades higher than minorities and men 0 4 grades higher than women In the AD ranks the figures are 0 5 and 0 6 respectively Considering that the components not including U S Attorneys’ Offices have hired an average of 800 attorneys per year over the last several years these differences translate to a substantial difference in the makeup of the overall entering group by demographic ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 74 There exist notable differences between groups In the GS ranks whites start on average at 0 4 grades higher than minorities and men 0 4 grades higher than women In the AD ranks the figures are 0 5 and 0 6 respectively Considering that the components not including U S Attorneys’ Offices have hired an average of 800 attorneys per year over the last several years these differences translate to a substantial difference in the makeup of the overall entering group by demographic ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 75 3 3 6 Performance appraisal The Department does not store attorneys’ performance appraisals electronically in any kind of database that could be used for statistical analysis This analysis would be valuable both to assess whether any systematic difference in outcomes between demographic groups exists and to use as a control in statistical tests which assess differences between groups in other outcomes such as promotion ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 75 3 3 6 Performance appraisal The Department p does not store attorneys’ y pperformance appraisals pp electronically y in any y kind of database that could be used for statistical analysis y This analysis y would be valuable both to assess whether anyy systematic y difference in outcomes between demographic g p ggroups p exists and to use as a control in statistical tests which assess differences between groups in other outcomes such as promotion ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 76 3 3 7 Promotion ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 76 3 3 7 Promotion We analyzed data related to three different dimensions of promotion—average grade at present duration between promotions at sub-SES levels and promotion into SES Average grade at present y data related to three different dimensions of ppromotion—average grade at present We analyzed duration between promotions at sub-SES levels and promotion into SES Average grade at present Statistical analysis of average current grades by demographic can add insight into the cumulative effects of the Department’s promotion system 31 y of average g current grades g Statistical analysis byy demographic can add insight into the cumulative m31 effects of the Department’s promotion system GS Attorneys GS Attorneys The following tables present results from analyses of attorneys’ current grade first without and then with statistical controls for tenure and component Due to data limitations discussed in section 2 2 2 we could not control for tenure one of the most important variables for attorneys hired before April 1993 The following tables present results from analyses of attorneys’ current grade first without and then with statistical controls for tenure and component Due to data limitations discussed in section 2 2 2 we could not control for tenure one of the most important variables for attorneys hired before April 1993 Table 3 3 7 1 Analysis of average current grades GS-11-15 employees Table 3 3 7 1 Analysis of average current grades GS-11-15 employees Measure Current job grade Men 14 5 Women1 14 3 Measure Current job grade Men 14 5 Women1 14 3 Measure Current job grade Whites 14 5 Minorities1 14 1 Measure Current job grade Whites 14 5 Minorities1 14 1 32 Statistically significant p 0001 1 Additionally grades are statistically different among racial groups black Hispanic Asian Native American and race gender groups white males white females minority males minority females 31 Attorneys’ current grades at present are also affected by their start grade We discuss these outcomes in section 3 3 5 32 This is the p-value which is defined as the probability—assuming that there were no difference in average current job grades between groups in the population of attorneys—of observing as large a difference in current average job grade in a random sample from the population as was observed in the sample that we examined Because the probability is so low we reject the assumption that there is no difference between groups in average current job grades in the population and conclude that there is a difference Statisticians conventionally consider a probability of 05 or 01 low enough to reject the assumption of equality in the population 32 Statistically significant p 0001 1 Additionally grades are statistically different among racial groups black Hispanic Asian Native American and race gender groups white males white females minority males minority females 31 Attorneys’ current grades at present are also affected d by their start grade We discuss these outcomes in section 3 3 5 32 This is the p-value which is defined as the probability—assuming that there were no difference in average current job grades between groups in the population of attorneys—of observing as large a difference in current average job grade in a random sample from the population as was observed in the sample that we examined Because the probability is so low we reject the assumption that there is no difference between groups in average current job grades in the population and conclude that there is a difference Statisticians conventionally consider a probability of 05 or 01 low enough to reject the assumption of equality in the population ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 77 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 77 Table 3 3 7 2 Analysis of average grades GS-11-15 attorneys controlling for seniority and component Table 3 3 7 2 Analysis of average grades GS-11-15 attorneys controlling for seniority and component Measure Current job grade Starting job grade Measure Current job grade Starting job grade Measure Current job grades1 Starting job grade2 Men 14 4 13 3 Women 14 1 12 9 Whites 14 3 13 2 Minorities 14 1 12 8 Measure Current job grades1 Starting job grade2 Men 14 4 13 3 Women 14 1 12 9 Whites 14 3 13 2 Minorities 14 1 12 8 Statistically significant p 001 Statistically significant p 0001 1 Whites blacks and Hispanics all show statistically significantly higher current grades than Asians Also white men hold higher current grades than white women and minority women minority men are higher than minority women and white women are higher than minority women All of these differences are statistically significant 2 Whites and blacks both show statistically significantly higher starting grades than Asians Whites but not blacks show statistically significantly higher starting grades than Hispanics Also white men are higher than white women and minority women minority men are higher than minority women and white women are higher than minority women All of these differences are statistically significant Statistically significant p 001 Statistically significant p 0001 1 Whites blacks and Hispanics all show statistically significantly higher current grades than Asians Also white men hold higher current grades than white women and minority women minority men are higher than minority women and white women are higher than minority women All of these differences are statistically significant 2 Whites and blacks both show statistically significantly higher starting grades than Asians Whites but not blacks show statistically significantly higher starting grades than Hispanics Also white men are higher than white women and minority women minority men are higher than minority women and white women are higher than minority women All of these differences are statistically significant Table 3 3 7 3 Analysis of starting grades Table 3 3 7 3 Analysis of starting grades Measure Percent starting at GS-15 Men 23% Women 14% Measure Percent starting at GS-15 Men 23% Women 14% Measure Percent starting at GS-15 Whites 21% Minorities 10% Measure Percent starting at GS-15 Whites 21% Minorities 10% Statistically significant p 0001 Statistically significant p 0001 Table 3 3 7 1 presents a simple comparison of average job grade and salary for all attorneys in grades 11-15 on the GS pay plan The analysis shows that women are at significantly lower job grades than men and that racial minorities are at significantly lower job grades than whites Table 3 3 7 1 presents a simple comparison of average job grade and salary for all attorneys in grades 11-15 on the GS pay plan The analysis shows that women are at significantly lower job grades than men and that racial minorities are at significantly lower job grades than whites As an example of the effects of these grade differences in practical terms we found that 67% of all GS attorneys are at currently grade 15 but this breaks down to As an example of the effects of these grade differences in practical terms we found that 67% of all GS attorneys are at currently grade 15 but this breaks down to § § § § 73% of white male GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 64% of white female GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 59% of minority male GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 and 47% of minority female GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 § § § § 73% of white male GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 64% of white female GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 59% of minority male GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 and 47% of minority female GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 A finer analysis of race effects shows that Asians are the least likely to be at grade 15 44% of Asian GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 followed by Hispanics 52% blacks 57% and Native Americans others 64% A finer analysis of race effects shows that Asians are the least likely to be at grade 15 44% of Asian GS attorneys are currently at grade 15 followed by Hispanics 52% blacks 57% and Native Americans others 64% The analysis in table 3 3 7 2 presents a more sophisticated look at the relationship between gender and race identity and grade for the GS population Analysis is based on 1 999 current GS attorneys about half of the DOJ total for which seniority data is available The analysis shows that even when seniority and component are taken into account there are statistically significant effects of both gender and race on both starting and current job grade The analysis in table 3 3 7 2 presents a more sophisticated look at the relationship between gender and race identity and grade for the GS population Analysis is based on 1 999 current GS attorneys about half of the DOJ total for which seniority data is available The analysis shows that even when seniority and component are taken into account there are statistically significant effects of both gender and race on both starting and current job grade ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 78 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 78 Table 3 3 7 2 shows that beyond the basic finding that men and whites are at higher grades than women and minorities blacks and Hispanics are at higher current grades than Asians and minority men and white women are at higher grades than minority women Table 3 3 7 3 shows that women and minorities are far less likely to start in DOJ at GS-15 than white men Table 3 3 7 2 shows that beyond the basic finding that men and whites are at higher grades than women and minorities blacks and Hispanics are at higher current grades than Asians and minority men and white women are at higher grades than minority women Table 3 3 7 3 shows that women and minorities are far less likely to start in DOJ at GS-15 than white men U S Attorneys’ Offices U S Attorneys’ Offices We conducted similar analysis for U S Attorneys’ Offices The following tables show results for non-supervisory attorneys in grades AD-20-29 We conducted similar analysis for U S Attorneys’ Offices The following tables show results for non-supervisory attorneys in grades AD-20-29 Table 3 3 7 4 Analysis of average grades AD attorneys controlling for seniority Table 3 3 7 4 Analysis of average grades AD attorneys controlling for seniority Measure Current job grade Starting job grade Men 27 4 21 4 Women 27 0 20 5 Measure Current job grade Starting job grade Men 27 4 21 4 Women 27 0 20 5 Measure Current job grades Starting job grade Whites 27 3 21 2 Minorities 27 1 20 6 Measure Current job grades Starting job grade Whites 27 3 21 2 Minorities 27 1 20 6 Statistically significant p 05 Statistically significant p 0001 Statistically significant p 05 Statistically significant p 0001 The analysis shown in table 3 3 7 4 indicates a significant effect of gender on current job grade within the non-supervisory segment of the U S Attorneys’ Offices—specifically women are at lower grades than men of comparable seniority—and a significant effect of race on job grade such that whites are at higher grades than minorities of comparable seniority The analysis shown in table 3 3 7 4 indicates a significant effect of gender on current job grade within the non-supervisory segment of the U S Attorneys’ Offices—specifically women are at lower grades than men of comparable seniority—and a significant effect of race on job grade such that whites are at higher grades than minorities of comparable seniority Although statistically significant the actual differences in average grade are quite small in both cases 0 2 grades for the race analysis and 0 4 grades for the gender analysis However the variance in grade is also very small in this organization—77 percent of Assistant U S Attorneys are at grade 29 the top grade —so small differences of average grade are meaningful here Although statistically significant the actual differences in average grade are quite small in both cases 0 2 grades for the race analysis and 0 4 grades for the gender analysis However the variance in grade is also very small in this organization—77 percent of Assistant U S Attorneys are at grade 29 the top grade —so small differences of average grade are meaningful here We also analyzed data for supervisory AUSAs Larger geographic offices use a AD-9-1 grade scale for supervisory AUSAs and smaller offices use a AD-19-10 scale In both scales a lower numerical grade indicates a higher rank—e g an AD-2 AUSA is a higher level than an AD-7 The following tables show the current job grades for men women whites and minorities in each of the supervisory scales For simplicity we transformed both scales to an ordinal scale where increasing grade corresponds to increasing rank33 We also analyzed data for supervisory AUSAs Larger geographic offices use a AD-9-1 grade scale for supervisory AUSAs and smaller offices use a AD-19-10 scale In both scales a lower numerical grade indicates a higher rank—e g an AD-2 AUSA is a higher level than an AD-7 The following tables show the current job grades for men women whites and minorities in each of the supervisory scales For simplicity we transformed both scales to an ordinal scale where increasing grade corresponds to increasing rank33 Table 3 3 7 5 Analysis of average grades supervisory AD attorneys in grades 1-9 controlling for seniority Table 3 3 7 5 Analysis of average grades supervisory AD attorneys in grades 1-9 controlling for seniority Measure Current job grade Men 3 5 Women 3 0 Measure Current job grade Men 3 5 Women 3 0 Measure Current job grade Whites 3 5 Minorities 3 0 Measure Current job grade Whites 3 5 Minorities 3 0 33 We transformed the 9-1 scale to 1-6 since only grades 7-2 are used for current attorneys and the 19-10 scale to 1-8 since only grades 18-11 are currently used 33 We transformed the 9-1 scale to 1-6 since only grades 7-2 are used for current attorneys and the 19-10 scale to 1-8 since only grades 18-11 are currently used ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 79 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 79 Table 3 3 7 6 Analysis of average grades supervisory AD attorneys in grades 10-19 controlling for seniority Table 3 3 7 6 Analysis of average grades supervisory AD attorneys in grades 10-19 controlling for seniority Measure Current job grade1 Men 5 5 Women 4 9 Measure Current job grade1 Men 5 5 Women 4 9 Measure Current job grade1 Whites 5 4 Minorities 4 4 Measure Current job grade1 Whites 5 4 Minorities 4 4 Statistically significant p 05 Statistically significant p 05 The analyses in tables 3 3 7 5 and 3 3 7 6 indicate no effects of gender or race on current job grade for supervisory AUSAs with similar seniority in the large offices In the small offices there is no gender effect but racial minorities appear to be at ranks lower than whites of similar seniority The analyses in tables 3 3 7 5 and 3 3 7 6 indicate no effects of gender or race on current job grade for supervisory AUSAs with similar seniority in the large offices In the small offices there is no gender effect but racial minorities appear to be at ranks lower than whites of similar seniority Summary of present grade findings Summary of present grade findings The analyses of upward mobility presented in this section indicate a number of significant gender and race effects In addition to the main effects of more positive results for men versus women and whites versus minorities it is also clear that 1 the correlation of race and grade is especially strong for Asians and 2 race and gender combine for a particularly strong negative effect of identity for minority women The analyses y of upward p mobilityy presented p in this section indicate a number of significant g gender g and race effects In addition to the main effects of more ppositive results for men versus women and whites versus minorities it is also clear that 1 the correlation of race and ggrade is especially p strong g for Asians and 2 race and gender combine for a particularly strong negative effect of identity for minority women Promotion rates Promotion rates We also analyzed the rates at which eligible attorneys were promoted each recent year The following table presents for each of the last three years the percentage of GS-14 attorneys who were promoted to GS-1534 We also analyzed the rates at which eligible attorneys were promoted each recent year The following table presents for each of the last three years the percentage of GS-14 attorneys who were promoted to GS-1534 Table 3 3 7 7 Promotion rates to GS-15 by demographic recent years Table 3 3 7 7 Promotion rates to GS-15 by demographic recent years Group Men Women 2001 26% 22% 2000 26% 24% 1999 21% 19% Group Men Women 2001 26% 22% 2000 26% 24% 1999 21% 19% Whites Minorities 23% 27% 25% 24% 18% 28% Whites Minorities 23% 27% 25% 24% 18% 28% Note that these figures which incorporate a degree of control of the base show that minorities have fared slightly better than whites and men have fared slightly better than women Note that these figures which incorporate a degree of control of the base show that minorities have fared slightly better than whites and men have fared slightly better than women 34 For control we only considered attorneys who were in the workforce for the entire previous year Percentages of attorneys promoted are of those who were at GS-14 on December 31 of the previous year For example the 26% white male figure for 2001 means that of white male attorneys who were at GS-14 on December 31 2000 and in the workforce for all of 2000 26% were promoted to GS-15 at some point in 2001 34 For control we only considered attorneys who were in the workforce for the entire previous year Percentages of attorneys promoted are of those who were at GS-14 on December 31 of the previous year For example the 26% white male figure for 2001 means that of white male attorneys who were at GS-14 on December 31 2000 and in the workforce for all of 2000 26% were promoted to GS-15 at some point in 2001 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 80 Duration between promotions ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 80 Duration between promotions The data corroborate the claim that most attorneys are promoted based on tenure—i e when they first become eligible based on time-in-grade minimum thresholds The following graphs show the average duration in days between promotions or between appointment in the case of attorneys’ base grade for whites versus minorities and men versus women on the General Schedule for each of the last several years35 The data corroborate the claim that most attorneys y are ppromoted based on tenure—i e when theyy first become eligible g based on time-in-grade g g p minimum thresholds The followingg graphs show the average g duration in days y between ppromotions or between appointment pp in the case of attorneys’ y base ggrade for whites versus minorities and men versus women on the General Schedule for each of the last several years 335 35 Totals include attorneys on the GM scale These figures do not take into account time at each individual’s current grade For example if an attorney was promoted to grade 14 three years ago this tenure is not included in this analysis See below for an analysis of tenure without a promotion The fact that we could not obtain personnel records prior to 04 18 93 imposes significant limitations on this analysis The consequences of the missing data are that 1 we cannot determine time between promotions for any promotion if any before 04 18 93 and 2 we cannot determine the time between any individual’s first promotion after 04 18 93 and his her immediate prior promotion if any Although these data limitations exclude a significant proportion of GS attorneys about 55% it does add insight into the recent experiences of relatively junior attorneys 35 Totals include attorneys y on the GM scale These figures g do not take into account time at each individual’s current ggrade For example p if an attorneyy was ppromoted to grade g 14 three years y ago g this tenure is not included in this analysis y See below for an analysis y of tenure without a ppromotion The fact that we could not obtain ppersonnel records pprior to 04 18 93 imposes p g y q significant limitations on this analysis The consequences of the missingg data are that 1 we cannot determine time between ppromotions for anyy ppromotion if any y before 04 18 93 and 2 we cannot determine the time between any y individual’s first ppromotion after 04 18 93 and his her immediate pprior promotion p if any y Although g these data limitations exclude a significant g t pproportion p of GS attorneys about 55% it does add insight into the recent experiences of relatively juniorr attorneys ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE JUNE 14 2002 KPMG CONSULTING PAGE 81 700 700 600 600 500 500 400 300 PAGE 81 400 300 200 200 100 100 0 JUNE 14 2002 KPMG CONSULTING Figure 3 3 7 1 Average number of days between promotions between GS grades whites and minorities Average number of days Average number of days Figure 3 3 7 1 Average number of days between promotions between GS grades whites and minorities ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 0 11 to 12 12 to 13 13 to 14 14 to 15 11 to 12 12 to 13 13 to 14 14 to 15 White 134 294 373 556 White 134 294 373 556 Minority 131 324 414 581 Minority 131 324 414 581 Grades Grades ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 82 600 500 500 400 400 300 200 100 0 KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 82 Figure 3 3 7 2 Average number of days between promotions between GS grades men and women 600 Average number of days Average number of days Figure 3 3 7 2 Average number of days between promotions between GS grades men and women ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 300 200 100 0 11 to 12 12 to 13 13 to 14 14 to 15 11 to 12 12 to 13 13 to 14 14 to 15 Male 126 297 378 568 Male 126 297 378 568 Female 138 307 387 551 Female 138 307 387 551 Grades Grades ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 83 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 83 Note that promotion rates for minorities are highly correlated with but consistently less than promotion rates for whites Promotion rates for men and women are virtually indistinguishable Note that promotion p rates for minorities are highly g y correlated with but consistently y less than promotion rates for whites Promotion rates for men and women are virtually indistinguishable These figures illustrate the time between promotions for employees who eventually made it to the higher level They could however mask a diversity issue if there were large groups of female or minority attorneys who reached a level below their potential and stalled there The following graphs analyze this phenomenon by exploring the average duration that current employees at GS-14 have been at that level We chose GS-14 because it is unlikely that an attorney would be stalled at a level below that36 These figures g illustrate the time between ppromotions for employees p y who eventuallyy made it to level They the higher g y could however mask a diversity y issue if there were large g ggroups p of female or minority y attorneys y who reached a level below their ppotential and stalled there The followingg graphs g p analyze y this phenomenon p byy exploring p g the average g duration that current employees p y at GS-14 have been at that level We chose GS-14 because it is unlikely that an 36 attorney would be stalled at a level below that 36 Attorneys on the GM pay plan are also included Durations are as of December 31 2001 36 Attorneys on the GM pay plan are also included Durations are as of December 31 2001 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 84 1500 1500 1400 1400 1300 1300 1200 1200 1100 1000 900 PAGE 84 1000 900 800 700 700 600 JUNE 14 2002 1100 800 Days KPMG CONSULTING Figure 3 3 7 3 Average duration to date at grade for current GS-14 attorneys Average number of days Average number of days Figure 3 3 7 3 Average duration to date at grade for current GS-14 attorneys ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE MINORITY WHITE FEMALE MALE 1043 1346 1267 1297 Group 600 Days MINORITY WHITE 1043 1346 Group FEMALE MALE 1267 1297 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 85 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 85 Note that the average GS-14 white attorney has been at that level nearly a year longer than the average GS-14 minority attorney and that the average GS-14 male and female attorneys have been at that level approximately the same duration Note that the average g GS-14 white attorneyy has been at that level nearly y a yyear longer g than the average g GS-14 minorityy attorney y and that the average GS-14 male and female attorneys have been at that level approximately the same duration Those attorneys not in the Litigating Divisions and especially outside Washington who have promotion potential only to GS-14 should be considered separately since an indefinite duration at GS-14 is not evidence of an adverse impact of HRM practices 37 The following figure hence repeats this analysis except for attorneys in the Litigating Divisions only who have Those attorneys y not in the Litigating g g Divisions and especially p y outside Washington g ppromotion potential p p y since an indefinite duration onlyy to GS-14 should be considered separately 37 at GS-14 is not evidence of an adverse impact p of HRM practices p The following figure hence repeats this analysis except for attorneys in the Litigating Divisions only 37 This might be evidence of disparate impact if minorities or women tended to reside in positions with only a GS-14 promotion potential at a disproportionate rate Note that this appears to be true based on the discussion in section 3 2 1 —the INS Bureau of Prisons and Executive Office for Immigration Review field offices are three major workforce strata with the highest proportion of minorities and two of the three components INS and BOP offer promotion potential to only GS-14 for most attorneys 37 This might g be evidence of disparate p impact p if minorities or women tended to reside in ppositions with only a GS-14 promotion potential at a disproportionate rate Note that this appears to be true based on the discussion in p p p p pp section 3 2 1 —the INS Bureau of Prisons and Executive Office for Immigration g Review field offices are three major of minorities and two of the three components INS and BOP j workforce strata with the highest g pproportion p offer promotion potential to only GS-14 for mostt attorneys ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 86 900 900 850 850 800 800 750 700 650 600 Days KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 86 Figure 3 3 7 4 Average duration to date at grade for current GS-14 attorneys Litigating Divisions Average number of days Average number of days Figure 3 3 7 4 Average duration to date at grade for current GS-14 attorneys Litigating Divisions ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 750 700 650 MINORITY WHITE FEMALE MALE 842 707 754 716 Group 600 Days MINORITY WHITE FEMALE MALE 842 707 754 716 Group ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 87 The difference is striking—the average GS-14 minority attorney has been in his her position significantly longer than the average GS-14 white attorney and the average GS-14 female attorney has been in her position slightly longer than the average GS-14 male attorney Promotion to SES ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 87 The difference is striking—the g average g GS-14 minority y attorney y has been in his her pposition significantly g y longer g than the average g GS-14 white attorney y and the average g GS-14 female attorney has been in her position slightly longer than the average GS-14 male attorney Promotion to SES We also analyzed accession from sub-SES ranks to SES ranks by demographics An average of about eight attorneys have been promoted into the SES ranks annually over the last several years The following table displays the data on promotion into SES over the last three years compared to the breakdown of the workforce by demographics Table 3 3 7 8 Promotion into SES by demographic 1999-2001 % of workforce Men Women 62% 38% % of GS-15 workforce 61% 39% Whites Minorities1 85% 15% 88% 12% We also analyzed y accession from sub-SES ranks to SES ranks by y demographics g p An average g of about eight g attorneys y have been promoted p y into the SES ranks annuallyy over the last several years The followingg table displays p y the data on promotion p into SES over the last three years compared to the breakdown of the workforce by demographics Table 3 3 7 8 Promotion into SES by demographic 1999-2001 % of promotions into SES 67% 33% Gap Men Women 62% 38% % of GS-15 workforce 61% 39% % of promotions into SES 67% 33% Gap 6% - 6% 79% 21% - 9% 9% Whites Minorities1 85% 15% 88% 12% 79% 21% - 9% 9% Also includes GM and SL attorneys Compared to GS-15 workforce % of workforce 6% - 6% Also includes GM and SL attorneys Compared to GS-15 workforce There are not enough SES positions to draw conclusions with a high level of confidence but it is evident that recent promotions into the SES have served to move its composition closer to that of the attorney workforce as a whole with respect to race but not with respect to gender There are not enough g SES ppositions to draw conclusions with a high g level of confidence but it is evident that recent ppromotions into the SES have served to move its composition p closer to that of the attorney workforce as a whole with respect to race but not with respect to gender We also found that across the Department a great many attorneys stated that while they are interested in advancing to the highest grade in their career ladder they are not interested in promotion to a supervisory position Minorities appear to hold this position more than whites In the case of an Assistant Chief or comparable position that is not accompanied by an SES membership there is no increase in salary associated with the new title and many attorneys do not find the status to be of value More importantly these attorneys do not wish to take on the supervisory or quasi-supervisory duties or pressures associated with the position We also found that across the Department p a ggreat many y attorneys y stated that while they y are interested in advancing g to the highest g g in their career ladder they y are not interested in grade ppromotion to a supervisory p y pposition Minorities appear pp to hold this position p more than whites In the case of an Assistant Chief or comparable p p that is not accompanied p by y an SES position membership p there is no increase in salary y associated with the new title and many y attorneys y do not find the status to be of value More importantly p y these attorneys y do not wish to take on the supervisory or quasi-supervisory duties orr pressures associated with the position Summary of promotion findings Interpretation of these outcomes in light of the processes described in section 3 2 7 4 is complex Data suggest that most attorneys who eventually make their highest potential grade get promoted based on longevity note in figures 3 4 4 1 and 3 4 4 2 that durations between promotion are less than six months to grade 12 less than one year to grade 13 about one year to grade 14 and about eighteen months to grade 15 and that minorities and women fare comparably or better than whites and men in terms of annual promotion rates but that attorneys who have not achieved their promotion potential tend to have been at their grade longer if they are minorities Additionally starting and current job grades tend to be lower department-wide for women and current job grades tend to be lower for minorities Summary of promotion findings Interpretation p g off the processes p of these outcomes in light described in section 3 2 7 4 is complex p Data suggest gg that most attorneys y who eventuallyy make their highest g potential p grade g get ppromoted based on longevity g y n note in figures g 3 4 4 1 and 3 4 4 2 that durations between ppromotion are less than six months to ggrade 12 less than one yyear to ggrade 13 about one year to ggrade 14 and about eighteen g months to ggrade 15 and that minorities and women fare comparably p y or better than whites and men in terms of annual ppromotion rates but that attorneys y who have not achieved their promotion p p g if they y potential tend to have been at their ggrade longer are minorities Additionally y startingg and current job j grades g tend to be lower department-wide for women and current job grades tend to be lower for minorities ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 88 3 3 8 Compensation ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 88 3 3 8 Compensation Another highly valued work outcome is compensation In an ideal environment for diversity identity factors like gender and race would not be correlated with compensation among people with similar qualifications We make the assumption that all DOJ attorneys are similar in education We also must assume that among the attorneys at each starting grade there is no correlation between gender or race and relevant job experience prior to DOJ 38 We have no way to test this assumption with the available data Another highly g y valued work outcome is compensation p In an ideal environment for diversity y identity y factors like ggender and race would nott be correlated with compensation p among g ppeople with similar qualifications q We make the assumption p that all DOJ attorneys y are similar in education We also must assume that amongg the attorneys y at each starting g ggrade there is no 38 8 correlation between ggender or race and relevant job experience prior to DOJ We have no way to test this assumption with the available data With these assumptions and constraints in mind we conducted a base-level analysis of how gender and race identity relate to annual salary These analyses show that there are significant effects of both gender and race on salary In general women appear to have lower salaries than men working in the same component and with similar seniority Likewise racial minorities appear to have lower salaries than whites with similar seniority who are in the same component and constraints in mind we conducted a base-level analysis With these assumptions p y of how ggender and race identity y relate to annual salary y These analyses y show that there are significant g effects of both ggender and race on salary y In ggeneral women appear pp to have lower salaries than men workingg in the same component p y Likewise racial minorities and with similar seniority appear to have lower salaries than whites with similar seniority who are in the same component The following table compares average salaries across grades components and locales i e headquarters or field The following g table compares average salaries across grades components and locales i e headquarters or field Table 3 3 8 1 Analysis of current average salaries GS attorneys controlling for seniority grade and component Table 3 3 8 1 Analysis of current average salaries GS attorneys controlling for seniority grade and component Measure Current salary Men $79 600 Women $76 100 Measure Current salary Men $79 600 Women $76 100 Measure Current salary1 Whites $78 700 Minorities $74 800 Measure Current salary1 Whites $78 700 Minorities $74 800 Statistically significant p 05 Statistically significant p 01 1 Whites have higher current salaries than each individual minority group Blacks are higher than Asians White men are higher than minority men white women and minority women minority men are higher than minority women and white women are higher than minority women Statistically significant p 05 Statistically significant p 01 1 Whites have higher current salaries than each individual minority group Blacks are higher than Asians White men are higher than minority men white women and minority women minority men are higher than minority women and white women are higher than minority women Table 3 3 8 2 Analysis of current average salaries AD attorneys controlling for seniority and grade Table 3 3 8 2 Analysis of current average salaries AD attorneys controlling for seniority and grade Measure Current salary Men $86 945 Women $84 529 Measure Current salary Men $86 945 Women $84 529 Measure Current salary Whites $86 681 Minorities $83 584 Measure Current salary Whites $86 681 Minorities $83 584 Statistically significant p 001 Statistically significant p 0001 Statistically significant p 001 Statistically significant p 0001 Of course because salary is a function of pay plan grade and locality for each attorney differences in salary are really manifestations of differences in step When controlling for component grade and salary we found that the average minority is currently residing approximately one-third step lower than the average white and the average woman is currently Of course because salary y is a function of ppayy pplan ggrade and locality y for each attorney y differences in salary y are really y manifestations of differences in step p When controllingg for component p ggrade and salary y we found that the average g minority y is currently y residing g approximately one-third step lower than the average white and the average woman is currently 38 This is one’s qualifications lead to the grade that one starts at—and there is no reason to suspect that qualifications within those grades are related to gender or race 38 This is one’s qqualifications lead to the ggrade that one starts at—and there is no reason to suspect that qualifications within those grades are related to gender or race ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 89 residing approximately one-half step lower than the average man These effects are statistically significant ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 89 residingg approximately pp one-half step lower than the average man These effects are statistically significant ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 90 3 3 9 Award and bonus allocation ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 90 3 3 9 Award and bonus allocation According to the Interactional Model one of the hallmarks of diversity success for organizations is that we find no correlation of identity factors like gender and race with any measures of job performance Moreover experience and input throughout the study suggests that awards— including recognition even if it does not include monetary remuneration—are an effective way of improving morale in the Department According g to the Interactional Model one of the hallmarks of diversity y success for organizations g is that we find no correlation of identityy factors like gender g and race with anyy measures of jjob pperformance Moreover experience p and input p throughout g the study y suggests gg that awards— including g recognition g even if it does not include monetary remuneration—are an effective way of improving morale in the Department Award and bonus allocation was not a major part of this study We did however analyze basic data about it in the course of the study Our analysis was based on data on three DOJ performance-based rewards Award and bonus allocation was not a major j ppart off this study y We did however analyze basic data about it in the course of the study Our analysis was based on data on three DOJ performance-based rewards § § § § Individual time off awards These are awards available across the federal government in the form of extra leave time generally granted in eight-hour increments 39 Individual cash awards Components are given annual award pools for distribution to attorneys at the discretion of management in the component 40 Quality step increases Quality step increases QSIs are single-step increases within individual grades of GS employees Steps which number 1-10 increase the base salary of employees and perhaps more significantly increase the starting step at which an employee will reside when he she is promoted to a higher grade QSIs can be based on merit or longevity The following tables present analyses of these data Individual time off ff awards These are awards available across the federal ggovernment in the form of extra leave time generally granted in eight-hour 39 increments § Individual cash awards Components p are ggiven annual award pools for distribution to 40 attorneys y at the discretion of management g in the component p § Q Qualityy step p increases Q Qualityy stepp increases QSIs Q are single-step g p increases within individual grades g p y p which number 1-10 increase the base of GS employees Steps salaryy of employees p y and pperhaps p more significantly g y increase the starting g step p at which an employee p y will reside when he she is promoted to a higher grade QSIs can be based on merit or longevity The following tables present analyses of these data Table 3 3 9 1 Individual time-off awards received calendar 2001 Table 3 3 9 1 Individual time-off awards received calendar 2001 Group Group Men Women Whites Minorities1 % of group receiving at least one award 8% 11% Average # of awards for those receiving them 1 43 1 56 9% 13% 1 44 1 68 Statistically significant p 05 1 Tests among individual racial groups showed no statistically significant difference minority women were statistically significantly more likely than other groups to receive awards 39 JMD staff suggest that these awards are often given for “collateral duties”—i e non-core functions which tend to be undesirable 40 It is unclear how these pools are allocated to components Men Women Whites Minorities1 % of group receiving at least one award 8% 11% Average # of awards for those receiving them 1 43 1 56 9% 13% 1 44 1 68 Statistically significant p 05 1 Tests among individual racial groups showed no statistically significant difference minority women were statistically significantly more likely than other groups to receive awards 39 JMD staff suggest gg that these awards are often given for “collateral duties”—i e non-core functions which tend to be undesirable 40 It is unclear how these pools are allocated to components ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 91 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING Table 3 3 9 2 Individual cash awards received calendar 2001 Table 3 3 9 2 Individual cash awards received calendar 2001 Group Group Men Women % of group receiving one or more awards 50% 47% Average # of awards for those receiving them 1 20 1 16 50% 43% 1 18 1 18 Whites Minorities1 Men Women JUNE 14 2002 % of group receiving one or more awards 50% 47% Average # of awards for those receiving them 1 20 1 16 50% 43% 1 18 1 18 Whites Minorities1 Statistically significant p 05 1 Tests among individual racial groups showed slightly statistically significant differences within the racial minority category Blacks were the least likely group to receive awards 41% received one or more awards and received the fewest among those who received awards 1 13 Statistically significant p 05 1 Tests among individual racial groups showed slightly statistically significant differences within the racial minority category Blacks were the least likely group to receive awards 41% received one or more awards and received the fewest among those who received awards 1 13 Table 3 3 9 3 Quality step increases received calendar 2001 Table 3 3 9 3 Quality step increases received calendar 2001 Group Group Men Women % of group receiving one or more QSIs 3 1% 4 1% Whites Minorities Whites Blacks Hispanics Asians Native Americans 3 3% 4 2% 3 3% 3 2% 5 0% 5 9% 0 0% Statistically significant p 05 Statistically significant p 05 Men Women PAGE 91 % of group receiving one or more QSIs 3 1% 4 1% Whites Minorities Whites Blacks Hispanics Asians Native Americans 3 3% 4 2% 3 3% 3 2% 5 0% 5 9% 0 0% Statistically significant p 05 Statistically significant p 05 The analysis in table 3 3 9 1 shows that women and minorities received statistically significantly more recognition in the form of time-off awards in 2001 compared to men and whites respectively Thus the association of identity and rewards actually favors members of cultural minority groups In theory this finding could be explained one of two ways either 1 all minorities’ and whites’ job performance was the same on average and QSI allocation was unfair or 2 minorities’ performance was better on average than whites’ It is also conceivable that more minorities received the least-valued form of award—i e QSIs as opposed to promotions The analysis y in table 3 3 9 1 shows that women and minorities received statistically y significantly more recognition g in the form of time-off awards in 2001 compared p to men and whites respectively p y Thus the association of identity y and rewards actually y favors members of cultural one of two ways minorityy groups g p In theory y this findingg could be explained p y either 1 all minorities’ and whites’ jjob pperformance was the same on average g and Q QSI allocation was unfair or 2 minorities’ performance p was better on average g than whites’ It is also conceivable that more minorities received the least-valued form of award—i e QSIs as opposed to promotions The data in table 3 3 9 2 give a different picture Women were both less likely than men to receive cash awards and received fewer awards per person among those who did receive them Likewise racial minorities were less likely than whites to receive cash awards although they received the same number of awards among people who receive any A more refined analysis of the race result shows that blacks and Asians were the least likely to receive cash awards 41% compared to 50% for whites and 56% for Native Americans The data in table 3 3 9 2 ggive a different picture p Women were both less likelyy than men to receive cash awards and received fewer awards per p pperson among g those who did receive them Likewise racial minorities were less likelyy than whites to receive cash awards although g they y received the same number of awards among g people p p who receive any y A more refined analysis y of the race result shows that blacks and Asians were the least likely to receive cash awards 41% compared to 50% for whites and 56% for Native Americans ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 92 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 92 The data in table 3 3 9 3 indicate that only a small percentage less than 5% of the workforce received step increases within grade during 2001 41 However women were significantly more likely than men to get the step increase while Hispanics and Asians were significantly more likely to get one than members of other race groups Another noteworthy finding is that no increases went to Native Americans The data in table 3 3 9 3 indicate that onlyy a small percentage p g less than 5% of the workforce received stepp increases within ggrade during g 2001 411 However women were significantly g y more likely y than men to gget the step p increase while Hispanics p and Asians were significantly g y more likely y to get g one than members of other race groups Another noteworthy finding is that no increases went to Native Americans In summary the available data on performance-based rewards present a mixed picture of identity effects A number of effects are present but they do not consistently favor either cultural majority group members or cultural minority group members In summary y the available data on pperformance-based rewards ppresent a mixed ppicture of identity effects A number of effects are ppresent but they y do not consistently favor either cultural majority group members or cultural minority group members 41 Most employees at GS-14 or below in the Litigating Divisions Executive Office for Immigration Review and U S Trustees and at GS-13 or below in the Bureau of Prisons and INS will rarely receive step increases because they tend to not remain at these grades long enough The number of employees at the higher levels who are eligible to receive increases is also limited either by a short term in the grade or because they have achieved the highest step for example of GS-15 attorneys in the Litigating Divisions 23% are at step 10 41 Most employees p y at GS-14 or below in the Litigating g g Divisions Executive Office for Immigration g Review and U S Trustees and at GS-13 or below in the Bureau of Prisons and INS will rarelyy receive stepp increases because theyy tend to not remain at these ggrades long g enough g The number of employees p y at the higher g levels who are eligible g to receive increases is also limited either by y a short term in the ggrade or because they have achieved the highest step for example of GS-15 attorneys in the Litigating Divisions 23% are at step 10 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 93 3 3 10 Retention Retention is the key factor for maintaining a diverse workforce both at the Department of Justice and elsewhere Despite the obvious importance of recruiting and hiring a diverse pool retention is even more important to lasting diversity for two main reasons § § The Department seeks diversity at all levels not just entry levels Although hiring direct-entry female and minority attorneys into management is a viable and important strategy to increase the diversity of the management attorney workforce by nature many managers do and should come from within the department Thus the management pool cannot reflect the diversity of the attorney workforce as a whole unless female and minority attorneys are retained at a rate sufficient to provide a pool of candidates for management As discussed in section 2 1 we characterize DOJ’s diversity objective as both a numerical representation of females and minorities in the workforce comparable to their representation in the labor pool and an environment in which female and minority attorneys are as satisfied and as fully utilized as white male attorneys Thus a diversity problem can be masked if disproportionately high attrition among female and or minority attorneys is offset by disproportionately high hiring of female and or minority attorneys ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 93 3 3 10 Retention Retention is the keyy factor for maintainingg a diverse workforce both at the Department p of Justice and elsewhere Despite p the obvious importance p of recruiting g and hiring a diverse pool retention is even more important to lasting diversity for two main reasons § § The Department p seeks diversity y at all levels not jjust entryy levels Although g hiringg direct-entry y female and minority y attorneys y into management g p is a viable and important strategy gy to increase the diversity y of the management g attorney y workforce by y nature manyy managers g do and should come from within the department p Thus the management g ppool cannot reflect the diversityy of the attorneyy workforce as a whole unless female and minorityy attorneys are retained at a rate sufficient to provide a pool of candidates for management g As discussed in section 2 1 we characterize DOJ’s diversity y objective j as both a numerical representation p of females and minorities in the workforce comparable p to their representation p in the labor ppool and an environment in which female and minorityy attorneys y are as satisfied and as fullyy utilized as white male attorneys y Thus a diversityy problem p p p y high g attrition amongg female can be masked if disproportionately and or minorityy attorneys is offset by disproportionately high hiring of female and or minority attorneys Attrition represents a complex organizational challenge for the Department Although the Department is an attractive place to work for attorneys attrition will always be high due to economic reasons—namely that attorneys can often make much higher salaries in the private sector especially in urban areas especially when the economy is strong and especially in light of the experience and skills that the Department imparts to them Attrition represents p p organizational g challenge g for the Department p Although g the a complex Department p is an attractive pplace to work for attorneys y attrition will always y be high g due to economic eco o c reasons—namely easo s a e y that t at attorneys atto eys can ca often o te make a e much uc higher g e salaries sa a es in the t e private p vate sector especially p y in urban areas especially p y when the economy y is strong and especially in light of the experience and skills that the Department imparts to them Attorneys and HR administrators at all levels throughout the Department unanimously agreed that DOJ will always attract a large number of talented attorneys who wish to work at the Department for a few years and take their experience to the private sector for a lucrative job Some attorneys find the work especially rewarding and stay longer than they expected they would when they joined DOJ and some might react positively to retention incentives that the Department offers but for most there seems to be nothing that the Department can do to prevent this pattern Attorneys y and HR administrators at all levels throughout g p y agreed g the Department unanimously that DOJ will always y attract a large g number of talented attorneys y who wish to work at the Department p for a few yyears and take their experience p to the pprivate sector for a lucrative jjob Some attorneys y find the work especially p y rewardingg and stay y longer g than they y expected p they y would when theyy joined j g react positively p y to retention incentives that the DOJ and some might Department p offers but for most there seems to be nothing that the Department can do to prevent this pattern There is nothing inherently wrong with that pattern however besides the high cost of attrition in general It is common in many organizations and many in fact rely on such a short-term workforce for important functions Most participants in the study agreed that this pattern does not need to represent a problem for DOJ especially given how predictable it is if components plan accordingly There e e iss nothing ot g inherently e e t y wrong w o g with w t that t at pattern patte however oweve bes besides des tthee high g cost oof att attrition in ggeneral It is common in manyy organizations g and many y in fact relyy on such a short-term workforce for important p functions Most pparticipants p in the studyy agreed g that this pattern p does not need to represent p a problem for DOJ especially given how predictable it is if components plan accordingly The circumstances in which this pattern might be a concern is if it had an adverse impact on diversity—that is if the segment of the workforce that stays at DOJ for a short time contributes to positive organizational outcomes and then moves on consists of a significantly different percentage of women and minorities than the workforce as a whole The circumstances in which this ppattern might g be a concern is if it had an adverse impact p on diversity—that y is if the segment g of the workforce that stays y at DOJ for a short time contributes to positive p organizational g outcomes and then moves on consists of a significantly different percentage of women and minorities than the workforce as a whole ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 94 Component opinion varied somewhat on this point Most participants hypothesized that this attrition segment of the workforce was representative of the racial and gender composition of the attorney workforce as a whole A few suggested various social factors which might lead to this workforce being more or less diverse than the DOJ attorney population as a whole More saliently some also suggested that women and especially minorities were more likely to leave DOJ sooner than white males because the private legal sector has the same diversity goals as DOJ and conducts targeted outreach to talented minority attorneys The following table provides the average tenure of recent Honors Program entrants42 Table 3 3 10 1 Average tenure of recent Honors Program hires Group Average tenure days 1 Men Women Whites Minorities ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 94 Component p opinion p varied somewhat on this ppoint Most pparticipants p hypothesized yp that this attrition segment g p of the racial and ggender composition p of the of the workforce was representative attorneyy workforce as a whole A few suggested gg various social factors which might g lead to this workforce beingg more or less diverse than the DOJ attorneyy population p p as a whole More saliently y some also suggested gg that women and especially p y minorities were more likely y to leave DOJ sooner than white males because the pprivate legal g sector has the same diversity y ggoals as DOJ and conducts targeted g outreach to talented minority y attorneys The following table provides the average tenure of recent Honors Program entrantss42 Table 3 3 10 1 Average tenure of recent Honors Program hires 989 1153 % who stayed 3 years or longer2 75% 74% % who stayed 5 years or longer3 61% 56% 1078 1018 75% 74% 59% 57% 1 Among those who departed in 1999 2000 or 2001 2 Among those who started between April 13 1993 and January 1 1999 3 Among those who started between April 13 1993 and January 1 1997 Note that there is virtually no difference in attrition patterns for these recent Honors Program hires Retention is not an HRM practice per se but rather an outcome that is the result of HRM practices and the organizational climate One retention tool that many organizations offer is a counseling program DOJ nominally offers such services in the Special Emphasis Programs office in the JMD Equal Employment Opportunity Staff EEOS The EEOS does not believe that these programs have a significant impact One reason is because they are isolated— geographically logistically and culturally—from attorneys’ day-to-day work climate Components also offer various ad hoc retention programs geared toward women and minorities U S Attorneys’ Offices offer retention bonuses Group Average tenure days 1 Men Women Whites Minorities 989 1153 % who stayed 3 years or longer2 75% 74% % who stayed 5 years or longer3 61% 56% 1078 1018 75% 74% 59% 57% 1 Among those who departed in 1999 2000 or 2001 2 Among those who started between April 13 1993 and January 1 1999 3 Among those who started between April 13 1993 and January 1 1997 Note that there is virtually no difference in attrition patterns for these recent Honors Program hires Retention is not an HRM ppractice per p se but rather an outcome that is the result of HRM ppractices and the organizational g climate One retention tool that many y organizations g offer is a counselingg pprogram g DOJ nominally y offers such services in the Special p Emphasis p Programs g Opportunity office in the JMD Equal q Employment p y pp y Staff EEOS The EEOS does not believe that these pprograms g have a significant g impact p One reason is because they y are isolated— ggeographically g p y logistically g y and culturally—from y attorneys’ y day-to-day y y work climate Components p also offer various ad hoc retention pprograms geared toward women and minorities U S Attorneys’ Offices offer retention bonuses Another important HRM tool related to retention is exit surveys also known as exit interviews Of the eleven components studied only the Bureau of Prisons regularly conducts exit surveys OARM has conducted exit surveys of Summer Law Intern Program participants and other components have conducted exit surveys with various degrees of formality over the years Exit surveys can be a valuable tool to understand the reasons for attrition and as we discuss in our recommendations section the Department should make more widespread use of them HRM tool related to retention is exit surveys Another important p y also known as exit interviews Of the eleven components studied only the Bureau of Prisons regularly conducts exit surve surveys OARM has conducted exit surveys y of Summer Law Intern Program g pparticipants p and other components p have conducted exit surveys y with various degrees g of formality y over the yyears Exit surveys can be a valuable tool to understand the reasons for attrition and as we discuss in our recommendations section the Department should make more widespread use of them Overall attrition for the attorney workforce was approximately 9% in calendar 2001 slightly higher than the few previous years The following table shows the attrition rate for the last three years by gender and race Overall attrition for the attorneyy workforce was approximately pp y 9% in calendar 2001 slightly g y higher g than the few pprevious years The following table shows the attrition rate for the last three years by gender and race 42 Data are for attorneys who started on or after April 13 1993 We assume that an attorney who started at the GS-11 or GS-12 level was an Honors Program hire 42 Data are for attorneys y who started on or after April 13 1993 We assume that an attorney who started at m hire h the GS-11 or GS-12 level was an Honors Program ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 95 Table 3 3 10 2 Attrition by gender 1999-2001 Group Men Women Attrition rate 6 8% 7 3% Whites Minorities 6 5% 9 7% ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 95 Table 3 3 10 2 Attrition by gender 1999-2001 Ratio 1 to 1 1 1 1 to 1 Group Men Women 1 to 1 5 1 5 to 1 Whites Minorities Attrition rate 6 8% 7 3% Ratio 1 to 1 1 1 1 to 1 6 5% 9 7% 1 to 1 5 1 5 to 1 The data in table 3 3 10 2 indicate that overall turnover rates for men and women in DOJ are similar43 but that that racial minorities are significantly more likely to leave DOJ by a margin of 1 5 to 1 44 The data in table 3 3 10 2 indicate that overall turnover rates for men and women in DOJ are similarr433 but that that racial minorities are significantly more likely to leave DOJ by a margin of 1 5 to 1 44 This study did not allow for an analysis of the work climate at the component level at a level of detail comparable to that for the department as a whole but it would be useful for the Department to further examine work climate factors in those components with significant differences for possible explanations of the differentials Figures B 11 and B 12 in appendix B provide more detail about attrition among all attorneys and GS-15 attorneys by component y of the work climate at the component p This studyy did not allow for an analysis level at a level of p p as a whole but it would be useful for the detail comparable to that for the department p to further examine work climate factors in those components p with significant g Department p of the differentials Figures g B 11 and B 12 in appendix pp B differences for ppossible explanations provide more detail about attrition among all attorneys and GS-15 attorneys by component Attrition among managers is extremely low Over the last five years an average of only three GS-15 supervisory attorneys and five noncareer SES attorneys have departed DOJ each year g is extremelyy low Over the last five years y an average g of only y three Attrition amongg managers GS-15 supervisory attorneys and five noncareer SES attorneys have departed DOJ each year Future turnover rates can often be reliably predicted by self-reported data on likelihood to stay In the survey we asked attorneys whether they intended to stay with the Department The following figure presents the results of that question y ppredicted by y self-reported p r data on likelihood to stay Future turnover rates can often be reliably survey vey we as asked ed atto attorneys eys w whether et e tthey ey intended te de to stay with the Department The In tthee su following figure presents the results of thatt question Figure 3 3 10 1 Likelihood to stay survey responses Q23 I expect to continue working here for at least the t3 5 years Figure 3 3 10 1 Likelihood to stay survey responses Q23 I expect to continue to working here for at least the next 3-5 years Q23 I expectt to co continue ntinue working here for at least the t3 5 years Q23 Q Q2 23 I expec expect p ct tto oc continue ontinue ue tto ow working orking ng h here ere re ffor or att lleast east st tthe he n next ext 3-5 -5 years years r Minoriti Women Minoriti Wom men White Men White Men 0% 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 43 The differential in attrition between genders was particularly high in U S Trustees 2 0 women left for every one man the Executive Office for Immigration Review 1 6 and the Civil Division 1 4 44 The differential in attrition between races was particularly high in the Environment and Natural Resources Division 2 9 minorities left for every one white the Antitrust Division 2 1 and the Civil Rights Division 2 1 100% 0% 20 % 40 % 60 % 80 % 100 % 0% 20% 40% 40% 40 60% 6 80% 80% 80 43 The differential in attrition between ggenders was pparticularly y high g in U S Trustees 2 0 women left for every onee m man Review 1 6 the Executive Office for Immigration g and the Civil Division 1 4 44 The differential in attrition between races was pparticularly y high g in the Environment and Natural Resourcess Divi Division n 2 9 2 minorities left for every one white the Antitrust Division 2 1 and the Civil Rights Division 2 1 2 100% ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 96 Responses to this question were very positive the race effect on the survey results is statistically significant while the gender effect is not Thus the data on the relationship of gender and race group on the likelihood of future turnover match those of actual past turnover rates ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 96 Responses p to this question q were veryy positive p the race effect on the surveyy results is statistically significant g while the gender g effect is not Thus the data on the relationshipp of ggender and race group on the likelihood of future turnover match those of actual past turnoverr rates ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 97 3 3 11 Conclusion to individual and organizational outcomes findings ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 97 3 3 11 Conclusion to individual and organizational outcomes findings The basis of the Interactional Model—that work climate factors lead to individual and organizational outcomes—holds for the DOJ data That is groups which rate the work climate less positively in interviews focus groups and survey responses also show less favorable tangible outcomes such as compensation promotion and attrition The basis of the Interactional Model—that work climate factors lead to individual and organizational g p which rate the work climate outcomes—holds for the DOJ data That is ggroups less positively p y in interviews focus groups g p and surveyy responses p also show less favorable tangible outcomes such as compensation promotion and attrition The goal of organization change is to raise all groups to a higher level of favorability regarding work climate—and consequently of improved work outcomes The rise in individual-level outcomes like job involvement and satisfaction should in turn increase outcomes for the organization The ggoal of organization g change g is to raise all ggroups p to a higher g level of favorability y regarding g work climate—and consequently q y of improved p work outcomes The rise in individual-level outcomes like job involvement and satisfaction should in turn increase outcomes for the organization ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 98 3 4 Benchmarking and best practices results ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 98 3 4 Benchmarking and best practices results Benchmarking of other federal agencies and research into best practices among corporations private law firms and other federal agencies were important parts of this study Benchmarking enables an organization to gain valuable points of reference that may be used for selfexamination and consequent self-improvement Although the Department is often cited as the largest law firm in the world it can still learn many valuable lessons from other organizations facing similar issues with their workforce This gives the organization a target at which to aim when realigning its policies and programs to make improvements g of other federal agencies g and research into best ppractices among g corporations p Benchmarking p law firms and other federal agencies g were important p pparts of this study y Benchmarking private g g valuable points p enables an organization to gain of reference that mayy be used for selfq self-improvement p Although g the Department p is often cited as the examination and consequent g law firm in the world it can still learn manyy valuable lessons from other organizations g largest g similar issues with their workforce This ggives the organization g a target at which to aim facing when realigning its policies and programs to make improvements This section presents the results of our research A bibliography of benchmarking and best practices sources used are provided in appendix C This section ppresents the results of our research A bibliography of benchmarking and best practices sources used are provided in appendix C 3 4 1 Benchmarking 3 4 1 Benchmarking This section presents comparisons of DOJ organizational outcomes to those of other comparable organizations This section presents p comparisons of DOJ organizational outcomes to those of other comparable organizations The following table demonstrates that even among the largest federal agencies DOJ has an exceptionally higher number of attorneys in its ranks The followingg table demonstrates that even among g the largest federal agencies DOJ has an exceptionally higher number of attorneys in its ranks Table 3 4 1 1 Attorney workforce in selected federal agencies Department 45 Justice Treasury Defense Social Security Administration Army Environmental Protection Agency National Labor Relations Board Commerce VA Labor Transportation Navy Air Force Health and Human Services Energy Interior HUD Education Agriculture State Number of Attorneys 9 223 2 521 458 1 605 1 026 1 040 771 781 738 605 576 567 359 495 456 381 356 274 242 180 Table 3 4 1 1 Attorney workforce in selected federal agencies Department45 Justice Treasury Defense Social Security Administration Army Environmental Protection Agency National Labor Relations Board Commerce VA Labor Transportation Navy Air Force Health and Human Services Energy Interior HUD Education Agriculture State Number of Attorneys 9 223 2 521 458 1 605 1 026 1 040 771 781 738 605 576 567 359 495 456 381 356 274 242 180 Number does not include services Number does not include services 45 Source OPM’s Office of Workforce Information December 2001 Attorneys are identified under job class 0905 in which most DOJ attorneys lie only 45 Source OPM’s Office of Workforce Information December 2001 Attorneys are identified under job class 0905 in which most DOJ attorneys lie only ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 99 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 99 DOJ attorney workforce versus civilian attorney workforce DOJ attorney workforce versus civilian attorney workforce DOJ’s attorney workforce is significantly more representative of the ethnic and gender makeup of the U S population than is the attorney workforce in the civilian U S labor market Women make up 38% of DOJ’s attorney workforce while only 30% of all attorneys are female Additionally DOJ minority attorney representation is greater than civilian minority attorney representation by 27% Other minorities including Asians Pacific Islanders and Native Americans are represented 57% more in the DOJ attorney workforce than in the civilian attorney workforce while representation of Hispanics is a slight 7% higher DOJ’s attorney workforce is significantly more representative of the ethnic and gender makeup of the U S population than is the attorney workforce in the civilian U S labor market Women make up 38% of DOJ’s attorney workforce while only 30% of all attorneys are female Additionally DOJ minority attorney representation is greater than civilian minority attorney representation by 27% Other minorities including Asians Pacific Islanders and Native Americans are represented 57% more in the DOJ attorney workforce than in the civilian attorney workforce while representation of Hispanics is a slight 7% higher Figure 3 4 1 1 Attorney workforce All civilian versus DOJ source 2000 Census Figure 3 4 1 1 Attorney workforce All civilian versus DOJ source 2000 Census 50% 50% 45% Civilian 37 8% DOJ 45% Civilian 40% 37 8% DOJ 35% 35% 30% 29 6% 30% 29 6% 25% 20% 15 4% 4 4% 4 1% Hispanic 12 1% 10% 3 6% 5 7% Other Minority 4 4% All Minorities Black Women 46 In comparison to other large federal agencies however the Department is only about equivalent in terms of female and minority representation The federal government attorney workforce as a whole is 38% female as is DOJ’s attorney labor force The federal workforce is 16% minority compared to 15% in DOJ We compared to DOJ to all cabinet-level agencies and all other agencies with 500 or more attorneys 12 1% 10% 3 6% 5% 5 7% 4 1% 2 3% Hispanic Other Minority 0% DOJ attorney workforce versus federal attorney workforce 46 15% 7 4% 5% 2 3% 25% 20% 15 4% 15% 7 4% 40% 0% Black All Minorities Women DOJ attorney workforce versus federal attorney workforce In comparison to other large federal agencies46 however the Department is only about equivalent in terms of female and minority representation The federal government attorney workforce as a whole is 38% female as is DOJ’s attorney labor force The federal workforce is 16% minority compared to 15% in DOJ 46 We compared to DOJ to all cabinet-level agencies and all other agencies with 500 or more attorneys PAGE 100 HHS SSA Education Labor Commerce NLRB EPA Interior HUD State VA Energy Transportation Treasury HUD Education HHS Commerce Transportation EPA NLRB Interior SSA Labor JUSTICE VA Energy Treasury Navy Defense Agriculture HUD Education HHS Commerce Transportation 0% EPA 0% NLRB 10% Interior 10% SSA 20% Labor 20% JUSTICE 30% VA 30% Energy 40% Treasury 40% Navy 50% Defense 50% Army 60% State JUNE 14 2002 Figure 3 4 1 3 Minority attorney representation in major Federal agencies source OPM 2001 60% Agriculture Agriculture Army HHS SSA Education Commerce NLRB Labor 0% EPA 0% Interior 10% HUD 10% State 20% VA 20% Energy 30% Treasury 30% Transportation 40% Agriculture 40% Navy 50% JUSTICE 50% Army 60% Defense 60% Figure 3 4 1 3 Minority attorney representation in major Federal agencies source OPM 2001 KPMG CONSULTING Figure 3 4 1 2 Female attorney representation in major Federal agencies source OPM 2001 Navy Figure 3 4 1 2 Female attorney representation in major Federal agencies source OPM 2001 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE JUSTICE PAGE 100 Army JUNE 14 2002 State KPMG CONSULTING Defense ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Diversity guidance Diversity guidance The federal government management community—namely OPM MSPB OMB GAO and EEOC—provides a good deal of guidance some mandated some suggested to agencies on HR management and diversity management in particular We incorporated this guidance into our The federal government management community—namely OPM MSPB OMB GAO and EEOC—provides a good deal of guidance some mandated some suggested to agencies on HR management and diversity management in particular We incorporated this guidance into our ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 101 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 101 approach to the study for DOJ to review for implementation following are discussions of some of the key points approach to the study for DOJ to review for implementation following are discussions of some of the key points Office of Personnel Management Office of Personnel Management OPM offers substantial guidance on creating a diverse workforce in a federal agency OPM recommends that each agency utilize its Human Capital Scorecard as an overarching framework to align its human capital policies to the agency’s mission and strategic plan The framework improves the agency’s human resources management by setting performance goals measures and operational application of these measures Along with this scorecard a guide has been created by OPM entitled “Building and Maintaining a Diverse Workforce ” which provides federal managers with a comprehensive how-to guide for improving diversity 47 The guide breaks down the approach to diversity into three stages OPM offers substantial guidance on creating a diverse workforce in a federal agency OPM recommends that each agency utilize its Human Capital Scorecard as an overarching framework to align its human capital policies to the agency’s mission and strategic plan The framework improves the agency’s human resources management by setting performance goals measures and operational application of these measures Along with this scorecard a guide has been created by OPM entitled “Building and Maintaining a Diverse Workforce ” which provides federal managers with a comprehensive how-to guide for improving diversity 47 The guide breaks down the approach to diversity into three stages § § § positioning the agency designing and implementing a diversity program and sustaining commitment § § § positioning the agency designing and implementing a diversity program and sustaining commitment OPM recommends that federal agencies use a methodical approach to diversify the organization but that agencies need to recognize that there is no “quick fix ” OPM suggests that agencies conduct “cultural audits” to define their strengths and weaknesses regarding diversity initiatives such as assessing if diversity is incorporated into the mission formal mentoring programs status reports etc Upon completion of the “cultural audit ” agencies can determine where diversity practices are lacking and where funds will be best served This gap analysis will provide the agency with increased knowledge of the proper steps to follow when designing and implementing their diversity programs OPM’s diversity guide provides agencies with a step-bystep process to benchmark and design policies as to fit a particular agency and its respective workforce OPM recommends that federal agencies use a methodical approach to diversify the organization but that agencies need to recognize that there is no “quick fix ” OPM suggests that agencies conduct “cultural audits” to define their strengths and weaknesses regarding diversity initiatives such as assessing if diversity is incorporated into the mission formal mentoring programs status reports etc Upon completion of the “cultural audit ” agencies can determine where diversity practices are lacking and where funds will be best served This gap analysis will provide the agency with increased knowledge of the proper steps to follow when designing and implementing their diversity programs OPM’s diversity guide provides agencies with a step-bystep process to benchmark and design policies as to fit a particular agency and its respective workforce Merit System Protection Board Merit System Protection Board The Merit System Protection Board MSPB is “an independent quasi-judicial agency” in the Executive Branch which focuses on the merit system within the federal workforce The MSPB provides the federal government with a merit-based assessment of its current programs analyzing human resource management trends issues such as sexual harassment and the role that the federal government plays in today’s socio-economic climate The Merit System Protection Board MSPB is “an independent quasi-judicial agency” in the Executive Branch which focuses on the merit system within the federal workforce The MSPB provides the federal government with a merit-based assessment of its current programs analyzing human resource management trends issues such as sexual harassment and the role that the federal government plays in today’s socio-economic climate MSPB has published numerous reports on the practice of fairness in human resources practices evaluations barriers for particular demographic groups and lessons learned from recruitment relocation and retention incentives MSPB stresses that fairness and even the perception of a fair working environment can play significant roles in recruiting hiring promoting and retaining a diversely qualified workforce MSPB’s reports provide many recommendations on how to approach creating a working environment that stresses fairness through a merit-based system which can be adapted to most organizations especially federal agencies MSPB has published numerous reports on the practice of fairness in human resources practices evaluations barriers for particular demographic groups and lessons learned from recruitment relocation and retention incentives MSPB stresses that fairness and even the perception of a fair working environment can play significant roles in recruiting hiring promoting and retaining a diversely qualified workforce MSPB’s reports provide many recommendations on how to approach creating a working environment that stresses fairness through a merit-based system which can be adapted to most organizations especially federal agencies 47 The report is available at http www opm gov Diversity guide htm 47 The report is available at http www opm gov Diversity guide htm ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 102 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 102 MSPB has drafted numerous studies on an array of topics and the organization tends to follow the same methodological approach utilizing continual attitudinal surveys to assess a particular workforce’s feelings about an issue In each study conducted MSPB employs a survey to capture an employee’s feelings before where possible and after a particular event has occurred For example MSPB uses attitudinal surveys to assess employees’ feelings as new hires and then track them as they progress in their particular agency MSPB also suggests that agencies periodically monitor the workforce distribution to ensure that workforce diversity objectives are being met One particular study to note is the MSPB’s report on the barriers to the Hispanic population achieving representation in the federal workforce 48 The study attempts to address the disparity in representation that Hispanics find among minority groups in the federal workforce MSPB has drafted numerous studies on an array of topics and the organization tends to follow the same methodological approach utilizing continual attitudinal surveys to assess a particular workforce’s feelings about an issue In each study conducted MSPB employs a survey to capture an employee’s feelings before where possible and after a particular event has occurred For example MSPB uses attitudinal surveys to assess employees’ feelings as new hires and then track them as they progress in their particular agency MSPB also suggests that agencies periodically monitor the workforce distribution to ensure that workforce diversity objectives are being met One particular study to note is the MSPB’s report on the barriers to the Hispanic population achieving representation in the federal workforce 48 The study attempts to address the disparity in representation that Hispanics find among minority groups in the federal workforce Office of Management and Budget Office of Management and Budget As the chief management component of the executive branch the Office of Management and Budget OMB ensures that the policies and practices of all Federal agencies are in line with the President’s initiatives As the chief management component of the executive branch the Office of Management and Budget OMB ensures that the policies and practices of all Federal agencies are in line with the President’s initiatives In his Management Agenda President Bush places the strategic management of human capital as first among his five government initiatives Most importantly the President has asked each government agency to develop coherent and coordinated plans for these initiatives Focusing solely on this first initiative human capital management it is apparent that a plan needs to be created and enforced for any initiative regarding human capital management especially an issue as complex as diversity The President’s Management Agenda briefly mentions the importance of maintaining a “a skilled knowledgeable diverse and high-performing workforce… ” but most importantly it discusses the factors including diversity that inadvertently affect the workforce In his Management Agenda President Bush places the strategic management of human capital as first among his five government initiatives Most importantly the President has asked each government agency to develop coherent and coordinated plans for these initiatives Focusing solely on this first initiative human capital management it is apparent that a plan needs to be created and enforced for any initiative regarding human capital management especially an issue as complex as diversity The President’s Management Agenda briefly mentions the importance of maintaining a “a skilled knowledgeable diverse and high-performing workforce… ” but most importantly it discusses the factors including diversity that inadvertently affect the workforce The initiatives set forth in the President’s Management Agenda hold the senior leadership and management of the agency directly accountable All parties must be committed to improving the overall environment for their employees and the policies governing them Within these initiatives two arguably emerge as applicable to this study—knowledge management and policy flexibility The President’s Management Agenda notes that knowledge management serves a great purpose in capturing and disseminating information relevant to the organization’s mission This knowledge transfer can positively impact employees especially minority employees by providing more insight into the day-to-day decisions occurring in the office The President has also recommended that agencies remain flexible with regard to HR practices thus allowing room for creativity to recruit promote and retain a qualified diverse workforce The initiatives set forth in the President’s Management Agenda hold the senior leadership and management of the agency directly accountable All parties must be committed to improving the overall environment for their employees and the policies governing them Within these initiatives two arguably emerge as applicable to this study—knowledge management and policy flexibility The President’s Management Agenda notes that knowledge management serves a great purpose in capturing and disseminating information relevant to the organization’s mission This knowledge transfer can positively impact employees especially minority employees by providing more insight into the day-to-day decisions occurring in the office The President has also recommended that agencies remain flexible with regard to HR practices thus allowing room for creativity to recruit promote and retain a qualified diverse workforce General Accounting Office General Accounting Office In 2001 the General Accounting Office GAO the investigative arm of Congress placed human capital management on its government-wide “high-risk list ” thus placing great attention on federal agencies’ efforts to improve their HR practices In 2001 the General Accounting Office GAO the investigative arm of Congress placed human capital management on its government-wide “high-risk list ” thus placing great attention on federal agencies’ efforts to improve their HR practices 48 The study is available at http www mspb gov studies hispanic pdf 48 The study is available at http www mspb gov studies hispanic pdf ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 103 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 103 Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Equal Employment Opportunity Commission The EEOC was established by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and began operating on July 2 1965 In addition to enforcing the statute protecting equal opportunity based on race ethnicity sex and other protected categories it is also applicable to later statutes guaranteeing equal pay for equal work and other equal employment areas The EEOC was established by Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and began operating on July 2 1965 In addition to enforcing the statute protecting equal opportunity based on race ethnicity sex and other protected categories it is also applicable to later statutes guaranteeing equal pay for equal work and other equal employment areas With regard to diversity issues the EEOC advises organizations to remain proactive and support all cultures and attitudes that are present According to the EEOC cultural as well as gender differences may emerge over the course of an individual’s career so it is best to train him her on the practices used to mitigate and embrace these differences The EEOC offers Technical Assistance Program Seminars TAPS to specifically address these type of issues With regard to diversity issues the EEOC advises organizations to remain proactive and support all cultures and attitudes that are present According to the EEOC cultural as well as gender differences may emerge over the course of an individual’s career so it is best to train him her on the practices used to mitigate and embrace these differences The EEOC offers Technical Assistance Program Seminars TAPS to specifically address these type of issues Conclusion to benchmarking findings Conclusion to benchmarking findings DOJ must continue to benchmark itself against other federal agencies and stay abreast of the guidance provided by the federal government management community By doing so the Department will be able to review processes directly relating to diversity occurring in other federal government agencies and the solutions that are being applied g g y abreast of the DOJ must continue to benchmark itself against other federal agencies and stay g pprovided by y the federal ggovernment management g community y By y doing g so the guidance p will be able to review pprocesses directly y relating g to diversity occurring in other Department federal government agencies and the solutions that are being applied ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 104 3 4 2 Best practices ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 104 3 4 2 Best practices As part of the study we performed extensive research on law firms corporations and federal agencies to identify a variety of best practices that may be explored by DOJ to further its efforts in creating a more diverse attorney workforce The following best practices were identified through a variety of sources including numerous personal interviews materials from relevant interest groups49 and publications Many of the best practice organizations have been cited and awarded for their initiatives demonstrating their commitment to diversity and the community’s recognition of their approaches The best practices included in this report were selected based on uniqueness proven success and their adaptability for use at DOJ and we endorse all of them for potential adoption by the Department As ppart of the study y we pperformed extensive research on law firms corporations p and federal agencies g to identifyy a variety y of best ppractices that may y be explored p by y DOJ to further its efforts in creating g a more diverse attorney y workforce The followingg best practices p were identified through g a variety y of sources including g numerous personal p interviews materials from relevant 49 49 interes st ggroups ps and ppublications Many Many of the best best practice p organizations g have been cited and interest awarded for their initiatives demonstrating g their commitment to diversity y and the community’s y recognition g of their approaches pp The best ppractices included in this report p were selected based on uniqueness q pproven success and their adaptability for use at DOJ and we endorse all of them for potential adoption by the Department Selected best practices are organized based on the particular phase of a comprehensive diversity strategy they seek to address Although some of these practices may affect multiple HR systems we have categorized them based on those objectives most relevant We examined the following areas—which DOJ identified as the most important processes to be covered in the study—to be addressed in creating a comprehensive strategy for achieving significant and long-lasting diversity Selected best practices p g p pphase of a comprehensive p diversity y are organized based on the particular strategy gy they y seek to address Although g some off these practices p may y affect multiple p HR systems y we have categorized g them based on those objectives j most relevant We examined the following areas—which DOJ identified as the most important p p to be covered in the study—to y be processes addressed in creating a comprehensive strategy for achieving significant and long-lasting diversity § § § § recruiting selection and hiring retention and promotion Each of these is discussed in turn Recruiting § § § § recruiting g recruiting selection and hiring hiring retention and promotion promotion Each of these is discussed in turn Recruiting Recruitment is critical to DOJ because it serves as a foundation for accomplishment of the other three practices Without effective diversity recruiting DOJ will not be able to provide a constant pool of attorneys appropriately represented from diverse gender racial and ethnic groups The following best practices give examples of how other organizations have addressed the issue of recruitment Recruitment is critical to DOJ because it serves as a foundation for accomplishment p of the other three ppractices Without effective diversity y recruiting g DOJ will not be able to pprovide a constant ppool of attorneys y appropriately pp p y represented p m diverse ggender racial p The from racial and ethnic ggroups following g best practices give examples of how other organizations have addressed the issue of recruitment 49 The interest groups researched for this section are as follows National Asian Pacific Bar Association National Bar Association Native American Bar Association Hispanic National Bar Association American Bar Association and Minority Corporate Counsel Association 49 The interest groups g p researched for this section are as follows National Asian Pacific Bar Association National Bar Association Native American Bar Association Hispanic National Bar Association American Bar Association and Minority Corporate Counsel Association ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 105 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 105 Practice Participation in varied recruitment efforts Organization Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field Type of Organization Private law firm Description Akin Gump participates in many diversity recruitment efforts including receptions mock interview programs and Black Law Student Association BLSA job fairs Applicability Creates more viable outreach avenues for diverse attorneys Practice Disclosure of information Practice Disclosure of information Organization Arnold Porter Organization Arnold Porter Type of Organization Private law firm Type yp of Organization Private law firm Description Arnold Porter maintains an open and informal culture through the use of its National Association for Law Placement NALP Law Firm Questionnaire which provides information on many topics including diversity efforts is made readily available to the general public 50 This form provides a plethora of information including attorney partner demographics case assignments hours worked compensation campus interview locations benefits and minority recruitment efforts Description p and informal culture through g the Arnold Porter maintains an open use of its National Association for Law Placement NALP Law Firm Questionnaire Q which pprovides information on manyy topics p including g diversityy efforts is made readilyy available to the ggeneral ppublic c50 This form pprovides a pplethora of information including g attorney partner yp demographics g p case assignments g hours worked compensation p campus interview locations benefits and minority recruitment efforts Applicability Creates more transparency into DOJ’s HR practices Applicability Creates more transparency into DOJ’s HR practices Practice Organization Type of Participation in varied recruitment efforts Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field Private law firm Organization 50 2002 Arnold Porter NALP Law Firm Questionnaire 2000-2001 Academic Year On-line Available http www arnoldporter com NALP NALP-DC pdf Description Applicability Akin Gumpp participates in manyy diversityy recruitment efforts p p g receptions p mock interview programs and Black Law including Student Association BLSA job fairs Creates more viable outreach avenues for diverse attorneys 50 2002 Arnold Porter NALP Law Firm Questionnaire 2000-2001 Academic Year On-line Available http www arnoldporter com NALP NALP-DC pdf p ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 106 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 106 Practice Disclosure of information interaction with stakeholders and universities Practice Disclosure of information interaction with stakeholders and universities Organization Hogan Hartson Organization Hogan Hartson Type of Organization Private law firm Type yp of Organization Private law firm Description Hogan Hartson’s process of achieving critical mass begins with a very diverse and open hiring committee that focuses on a specific set of criteria that is defined on the firm’s website The firm also annually participates at a number of minority job fairs and career conferences including the Harvard BLSA Job Fair and the Hispanic Bar Association Job Fair 51 Hogan Hartson also makes an effort to visit a wide variety of law schools to find diverse candidates including American University Howard University University of Miami and Harvard University Description Hogan g Hartson’s pprocess of achievingg critical mass begins g with a very y diverse and open p hiring g committee that focuses on a specific p set of criteria that is defined on the firm’s website The firm also annuallyy pparticipates p j fairs and career conferences at a number of minorityy job including ngg the t e Harvard a va d BLSA S Job Fair a aand d tthee Hispanic spa c Bar a Association sso 51 Job Fair r Hogan Hartson also makes an effort to visit a wide varietyy of law schools to find diverse candidates including g American University y Howard University University of Miami and Harvard University Applicability Provides more transparency into the hiring process and creates more viable outreach avenues for diverse attorneys Applicability Provides more transparency p y into the hiring g pprocess and creates more viable outreach avenues for diverse attorneys Practice Interaction with stakeholders Practice Interaction with stakeholders Organization International Paper Organization International Paper Type of Organization Corporation Type yp of Organization Corporation Description International Paper promotes diversity in its partnerships with minority associations such as the Minority Corporate Counsel Association MCCA and minority job fairs Description International Paper p ppromotes diversityy in its ppartnerships p with minority associations such as the Minorityy Corporate Counsel Association MCCA and minority job fairs Applicability Creates more viable outreach avenues for diverse attorneys Applicability Creates more viable outreach avenues for diverse attorneys 51 2002 Hogan Hartson Recruiting web page On-line Available http www hhlaw com recruiting 51 2002 Hogan Hartson Recruiting web page O On On-line -line Available http www hhlaw com recruiting ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 107 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 107 Practice Minority student outreach programs Practice Minority student outreach programs Organization United States Department of Agriculture USDA Organization United States Department of Agriculture USDA Type of Organization Federal agency Type yp of Organization Federal agency Description USDA participates in several programs geared towards minority candidates including the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities Internships the American Indian Higher Education Consortium – Washington Internships for Native American Students AIHEC-WINS a ten-week learning experience for future Native American leaders and the Law School Civil Rights Intern which is a shared USDA Howard University initiative to provide opportunities for Howard University’s law students to practice law within the Department for a summer Description USDA participates p p in several pprograms g ggeared towards minority y candidates includingg the Hispanic p Association of Colleges g and Universities Internships p the American Indian Higher g Education Consortium – Washington g Internships p for Native American Students AIHEC-WINS a ten-week learningg experience p for future Native American leaders and the Law School Civil Rights g Intern which is a shared USDA Howard University y initiative to pprovide opportunities pp for Howard University’s y law students to practice law within the Department for a summer Applicability Provides insight into more creative programs to increase exposure for younger individuals wishing to enter government and the legal profession Applicability Provides insight g into more creative programs p g to increase exposure p for yyounger g individuals wishing to enter government and the legal profession Selection and hiring This aspect involves interviewing qualified female and minority attorney candidates evaluating qualifications extending offers and bringing in new hires for attorney positions This step bridges the gap between recruiting female and minority employees and actually bringing them on board Selection and hiring p involves interviewingg qqualified female and minority y attorney y candidates evaluating g This aspect q extending g offers and bringing g g in new hires for attorney y ppositions This step p bridges g qualifications the gap between recruiting female and minority employees and actually bringing them on board Practice Hiring committees for diversity Practice Hiring committees for diversity Organization Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field Organization Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field Type of Organization Private law firm Type yp of Organization Private law firm Description Akin Gump has established a hiring committee to seek minority participants for its summer program from around the country which enhances both demographic and geographic diversity Description Akin Gumpp has established a hiringg committee to seek minority y pparticipants p for its summer pprogram g from around the country which enhances both demographic and geographic diversity Applicability Committee process helps lessen the impact of the section chief and also increases possibility of receiving applicants from a variety of untapped sources Applicability Committee process p helps p lessen the impact p of the section chief and also increases possibility of receiving applicants from a variety of untapped sources ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 108 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Practice Diversity committee Practice Diversity committee Organization International Paper Organization International Paper Type of Organization Corporation Type of Organization Corporation Description International Paper promotes diversity within its own doors as well as within those organizations that it partners with The Office of General Counsel formed a Diversity Task team to focus and monitor the opportunities being presented to female and or minority attorneys Description International Paper p promotes p diversityy within its own doors as well as within those organizations g p that it partners with The Office of General Counsel formed a Diversity y Task team to focus and monitor the opportunities being presented to female and or minority attorneys Applicability Takes hiring control away from a single individual e g Section Chief Applicability Takes hiring control away from a single individual e g Section Chief Retention PAGE 108 Retention The retention aspect of diversity management involves using the data to provide explanations as to why female and minority attorneys are or are not retained at the desired rates in DOJ components The retention aspect involves using as to p of diversity y management g g the data to pprovide explanations p why female and minority attorneys are or are not retained at the desired rates in DOJ components Practice Networking groups and mentoring Practice Networking groups and mentoring Organization International Business Machines Corporation IBM Organization International Business Machines Corporation IBM Type of Organization Corporation Type yp of Organization Corporation Description IBM has an ad hoc networking group which links women in technological positions around the world Further opportunities are provided through mentoring programs which pair high-level executives with women with potential These mentors are created at the geographic division and business-unit levels The success of the combined programs is seen in the rise of women executives from 11% in 1995 to 18% in 1999 Description IBM has an ad hoc networkingg ggroupp which links women in technological g ppositions around the world Further opportunities pp are pprovided through g mentoringg programs p g which ppair high-level g executives with women with potential p These mentors are created at the geographic g g p division and business-unit levels The success of the combined programs p g is seen in the rise of women executives from 11% in 1995 to 18% in 1999 Applicability Addressing more creative ways to improve DOJ mentoring techniques Applicability Addressing more creative ways to improve DOJ mentoring techniques ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 109 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 109 Practice Work life balance Practice Work life balance Organization United States Department of Agriculture USDA Organization United States Department of Agriculture U USDA Type of Organization Federal agency Type yp of Organization Federal agency Description Many of USDA’s policies today focus on the issue of work life balance and promoting diversity in its workforce Through its work life program USDA provides work life news coordinators programs and services such as child care programs Description Many y of USDA’s policies p todayy focus on the issue of work life balance aandd promoting p o ot g diversity d ve s ty in its ts workforce wo o ce Through oug its ts work wo lifee pprogram g USDA provides p work life news coordinators programs and services such as child care programs Applicability Provides more flexibility and a communication outlet for those attorneys attempting to balance a family and a career at DOJ Applicability Provides more flexibilityy and a communication outlet for those attorneys attempting to balance a family and a career at DOJ Practice Diversity counsels Practice Diversity counsels Organization United States Department of Agriculture USDA Organization United States Department of Agriculture USDA Type of Organization Federal agency Type yp of Organization Federal agency Description USDA has developed diversity counsels to deal with diversity concerns Staff members are assigned to a certain counsel and the counsel serves as a resource where staff members can get information answer Equal Employment Opportunity EEO questions and address conflicts Description USDA has developed p diversity y counsels to deal with diversityy concerns Staff members are assigned g to a certain counsel and the counsel serves as a resource where staff members can gget information answer Equal q Employment Opportunity EEO questions and address conflicts Applicability Directly addresses communication informal integration within the attorney workforce through a diversity-related contact Applicability the Directly y addresses communication informal integration within g attorney workforce through a diversity-related contact ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 110 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 110 Practice Cultural awareness Practice Cultural awareness Organization U S Patent Trademark Office Organization U S Patent Trademark Office Type of Organization Federal agency Type yp of Organization Federal agency Description The USPTO holds several community days when employees celebrate a number of themes that focus on diversity including the Community Day 2000 theme of “Recognizing Our Similarities Embracing Our Differences ”52 One example of how the USPTO embraces its diversity is the USPTO Museum which often dedicates exhibits such as Women Colors of Innovation Women’s Month or the African American Employment Program AAEP Description The USPTO holds several community y days y when employees p y celebrate a number of themes that focus on diversity y including g the Community Day y 2000 theme of “Recognizing g g Our Similarities Embracingg Our Differences ””52 One example p of how the USPTO embraces its diversityy is the USPTO Museum which often dedicates exhibits such as Women Colors of Innovationn Women’s W Month or the African American Employment Program AAEP Applicability Provides an outlet to address common misperceptions and stereotyping Applicability Provides an outlet to address common misperceptions and stereotyping Practice Supplemental programs for retention and positive working environment Practice Supplemental programs for retention and positive working environment Organization Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field Organization Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field Type of Organization Private Law Firm Type yp of Organization Private Law Firm Description Akin Gump has created a communication stipend for devices cell phones laptops et cetera that makes it easier for individuals to work from home This is considered a supplemental program to coincide with the counsel position an intermediate position for those individuals on the partner track to increase retention and create a positive working environment Other such programs include financial assistance e g mortgage and flexible part-time work schedules Description Akin Gumpp has created a communication stipend p for devices c cell pphones laptops p p et cetera that makes it easier for individuals to work from home This is considered a supplemental pp pprogram g to coincide with the counsel position an intermediate position for those individuals on the partner p track to increase retention and create a ppositive working environment Other such programs include financ financial assistance e g mortgage and flexible part-time work schedules Applicability Provides creative programs to increase retention at DOJ Applicability Provides creative programs to increase retention at DOJ 52 USPTO Press Release “Deputy Commerce Secretary Celebrates USPTO’s Many Facets of Diversity ”8 2 01 www uspto gov 52 USPTO Press Release “Deputy Commerce Secretary Celebrates USPTO’s Many Facets of Diversity ”8 2 01 www uspto gov ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 111 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 111 Practice Extending hiring criteria Practice Extending hiring criteria Organization Morrison Foerster Organization Morrison Foerster Type of Organization Private law firm Type yp of Organization Private law firm Description Morrison Foerster has altered the firm’s hiring criteria to include overcoming significant challenges rather than just academic and work experience because the firm’s partners feel that it is a good predictor of the tenacity and creativity it takes to be a great lawyer ”53 Description Morrison Foerster has altered the firm’s hiringg criteria to include g significant g g rather than just j academic and work overcoming challenges p because the firm’s ppartners feel that it is a ggood predictor of experience the tenacity and creativity it takes to be a great lawyer ””53 Applicability Broadens the qualifications required for experienced attorneys Applicability Broadens the qualifications required for experienced attorneys Practice Exit surveys Practice Organization Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry CDC ATSDR Organization Type of Organization Federal agency Type yp of Organization Description The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry collaborated with the Human Resources Management Office to analyze employee retention patterns They have incorporated an official policy of surveys including exit interviews to collect data and track departure patterns including data on opinions on organizational culture and its effects on diversity climate CDC ATSDR uses the data to identify patterns indicating a diversity-adverse climate and to correct existing problems Description Applicability Provides a continual attitudinal measure of the attorney workforce Applicability 53 Thelen Jennifer 2002 MoFo’s Rainbow One of the Most Diverse Firms in the Country Didn’t’ Get That Way Overnight Available http http www mofo com about ArticleDetail cfm concentrationID ID 689 Type 4 Exit surveys g for Toxic Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Agency y C CDC ATSDR Substances and Disease Registry CDC ATSDR Federal agency g y for Toxic The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Agency g y collaborated with the Human Resources Substances and Disease Registry g y employee p y retention ppatterns They y have Management Office to analyze p an official policy p y of surveys y including g exit interviews to incorporated collect data and track departure patterns including data on opinions on o ga at o a cu tu e aand d its ts eeffects ects oon ddiversity ve s ty cclimate ate C C S organizational culture CDC ATSDR p in uses the data to identifyy patterns indicating a diversity-adverse climate and to correct existing problems Provides a continual attitudinal measure of the attorney workforce 53 Thelen Jennifer 2002 MoFo’s Rainbow One of the Most Diverse Firms in the Country Didn’t’ Get That Wayy Overnight g Available http p http www mofo com about ArticleDetail cfm concentrationID ID 689 Type 4 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 112 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Practice Work life balance policies Practice Work life balance policies Organization Arnold Porter Organization Arnold Porter Type of Organization Private law firm Type yp of Organization Private law firm Description Arnold Porter’s Washington office has addressed an important work life balance issue by providing full-time child-care on site In addition the Children’s Center provides free back-up care when an employee’s child care arrangements fall through 54 Description Arnold Porter’s Washington g office has addressed an important p work life balance issue by y pprovidingg full-time child-care on site In addition the Children’s Center pprovides free back-up care when an employee’s child care arrangements fall through h54 Applicability Provides more flexibility for those attorneys attempting to balance a family and a career at DOJ Applicability Provides more flexibilityy for those attorneys attempting to balance a family and a career at DOJ Practice Practice group rotation program Practice Practice group rotation program Organization Hogan Hartson Organization Hogan Hartson Type of Organization Private law firm Type yp of Organization Private law firm Description Upon entering Hogan Hartson junior associates are placed into an assigned practice group and a rotation program where they can experience several of the firm’s practice groups over a defined period of time These junior associates then convey their preferences to the administrators of the three main practice groups who then make the final placement decision The firm believes that this rotation program provides new hires with an orientation to the firm allowing each individual a period of acclimation and an opportunity to see which practice area suits their interests Attorneys are nurtured with regards to professional development through practice group meetings training and most importantly feedback Description Upon p enteringg Hogan g Hartson junior j r associates are pplaced into an assigned g ppractice ggroup p and a rotation pprogram g where they y can experience p several of the firm’s ppractice ggroups p over a defined pperiod of time These jjunior associates then convey y their ppreferences to the administrators of the three main ppractice ggroups p who then make the final pplacement decision The firm believes that this rotation pprogram pprovides new hires with an orientation to the firm allowingg each individual a period of acclimation and an opportunity to see which ppractice area suits their interests Attorneys y are nurtured with regards g to pprofessional development p through practice group meetings training and most importantly feedback Applicability Provides formal professional development program to address retention Applicability Provides formal professional development program to address retention 54 2002 Arnold Porter’s Washington DC Office Overview On-line Available http www arnoldporter com tableset cfm text associates_dc gif recruiting toolbar recruiting 54 2002 Arnold Porter’s Washington g DC Office ff Overview On-line Available http www arnoldporter com tableset cfm text associates_dc gif recruiting toolbar recruiting PAGE 112 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 113 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 113 Practice Compensation linkage to diversity initiatives Practice Compensation linkage to diversity initiatives Organization Bell Atlantic Organization Bell Atlantic Type of Organization Corporation Type yp of Organization Corporation Description In its business plan Bell Atlantic describes the benefits of a diverse workforce for both the bottom line and the working environment The company has tied performance to financial rewards Recruiters are required to submit a list of diverse employees for every job and managers have their compensation linked to their diversity goals Bell Atlantic then monitors the progress of their diversity efforts through a four-person diversity committee headed by the company’s general counsel Description p Bell Atlantic describes the benefits of a diverse In its business plan workforce for both the bottom line and the workingg environment The p y has tied performance p company to financial rewards Recruiters are q p y for every y jjob and required to submit a list of diverse employees g have their compensation p y ggoals Bell managers linked to their diversity p g g a Atlantic then monitors the progress of their diversityy efforts through p four-person diversity committee headed by the company’s general counsel Applicability Addresses accountability regarding diversity initiatives Applicability Addresses accountability regarding diversity initiatives Practice Compensation linkage to diversity initiatives Practice Compensation linkage to diversity initiatives Organization Allstate Organization Allstate Type of Organization Corporation Type of Organization Corporation Description Allstate ensures that diversity initiatives are being implemented by linking all managers’ bonuses to how well they develop and maintain a diverse workforce The strategy has produced impressive results 41 5% of the company’s executives are women and 21% of top spots are held by minorities 10% more than the national average Description Allstate ensures that diversityy initiatives are being by g implemented p y linkingg all managers’ g bonuses to how well theyy developp and maintain a gy has pproduced impressive p diverse workforce The strategy results p y executives are women and 21% of top spots 41 5% of the company’s are held by minorities 10% more than the national average Applicability Addresses accountability regarding diversity initiatives Applicability Addresses accountability regarding diversity initiatives ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 114 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 114 Practice Management openness and accountability Practice Organization Microsoft Corporation Organization Type of Organization Corporation Type yp of Organization Description Microsoft promotes an open environment through transparency into their policies by listing it as one of its eight corporate values as well as dedicating an entire web-page to the subject At Microsoft’s diversity page an employee and potential hires have access to where the company is advertising the organization’s goals the recruiting events calendar partnership organizations employee groups as well as a bimonthly diversity newsletter Microsoft Pathways The company has also created a Diversity Advisory Council with many members from its employee groups Description Applicability Creates more transparency into HR practices Applicability Creates more transparency into HR practices Practice Diversity training Practice Diversity training Organization Federal Communications Commission FCC Organization Federal Communications Commission FCC Type of Organization Federal agency Type yp of Organization Federal agency Description The FCC’s development of the Office of Workplace Diversity has helped the leadership team understand internal issues that are facing the Agency This office manages the internal EEO Compliance Program recruits and trains EEO counselors coordinates special observances trains Commission staff on workplace issues such as race relations and dealing with the disabled individuals issues Description The FCC’s development p of the Office of Workplace p Diversity y has helped p the leadership p team understand internal issues that are facing g the Agency ge cy Thiss office o ce manages a ages the t e internal te a EEO O Compliance Co p a ce Program og a recruits and trains EEO counselors coordinates special p observances trains Commission staff on workplace p issues such as race relations and dealing with the disabled individuals issues Applicability Creates a more knowledgeable attorney workforce regarding diversity Applicability Creates a more knowledgeable attorney workforce regarding diversity Management openness and accountability Microsoft Corporation Corporation Microsoft ppromotes an open p environment through g transparency p y into their ppolicies by y listingg it as one of its eight g corporate p values as well as g an entire web-page p g to the subject j At Microsoft’s diversity dedicating page g an employee p y and potential p hires have access to where the p y is advertising g the organization’s g g the recruitingg events company goals p p organizations g employee p y groups g p as well as a bicalendar partnership f Pathways y The company p y has monthlyy diversityy newsletter Microsoft aalso so ccreated eated a Diversity ve Advisory Council with many members from its employee groups ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 115 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 115 Practice Mentoring Practice Mentoring Organization DuPont Organization DuPont Type of Organization Corporation Type yp of Organization Corporation Description DuPont promotes and supports diversity efforts both internally and externally by sharing its “best practices ” DuPont has partnered with Street Law American Corporate Counsel Association ACCA and several law firms to develop the “Pipeline Kit ” which is a compilation of best practices in the law profession Along with this kit DuPont has formed a “Pipeline Committee” to mentor young adults who demonstrate penchant for the engineering or law profession Description DuPont promotes p pp p y efforts both internally y and and supports diversity externally y by y sharing g its “b p DuPont has ppartnered with “bestt practices ” Street Law American Corporate p Counsel Association ACCA and several law firms to developp the “Pipeline p Kit ” which is a compilation p of best ppractices in the law pprofession Alongg with this kit DuPont has formed a “Pipeline p Committee” to mentor yyoung g adults who demonstrate penchant for the engineering or law profession Applicability Introduces new and exciting programs to help nurture the attorney workforce Applicability Introduces new and exciting programs to help nurture the attorney workforce Practice Empowerment and promotion of women Practice Empowerment and promotion of women Organization DuPont Organization DuPont Type of Organization Corporation Type yp of Organization Corporation Description The DuPont Women Lawyers’ Network offers a new approach to empowering female attorneys by bringing women’s diverse voices together where they will be heard without interruption or condescension With the tension of communicating in a man’s world eliminated the energy of the group increased ten-fold ” 55 Description The DuPont Women Lawyers’ y Network offers a new approach pp to empowering p g female attorneys y by y bringing g g women’s diverse voices together g where they y will be heard without interruption p or condescension With the tension off communicating g in a man’s world 55 eliminated ed the energy of the group increased ten-fold ten-fold ”” Applicability Introduces new and exciting programs to help nurture the attorney workforce Applicability Introduces new and exciting programs to help nurture the attorney workforce Promotion Promotion This aspect plays an substantial role in retention but for the purposes of this study we have separated it out for an intensive review It involves identifying areas where the diversity climate within DOJ may not support the promotion of female and or minority attorneys and based on this identification establishing corrective action measures to address the problems The Interactional Model helps This aspect p pplays y an substantial role in retention but for the ppurposes p of this study y we have separated p it out for an intensive review It involves identifying y g areas where the diversity y climate within DOJ may y not support pp the ppromotion of female and or minority y attorneys y and based on this identification establishing corrective action measures to address the problems The Interactional Model helps 55 Passante Lisa M et al Creating the DuPont Women Lawyer’s Network Women’s group is catalyst for understanding and empowerment On-Line Available http www mcca com site data corporate BP dupont899 htm 55 Passante Lisa M et al Creatingg the DuPont Women Lawyer’s Network Women’s group is catalyst for understandingg and empowerment p On-Line Available http www mcca com site data corporate BP dupont899 htm ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 116 provide explanations as to why this practice exists and what measures can be taken to address each accordingly ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 116 pprovide explanations p as to why this practice exists and what measures can be taken to address each accordingly Practice Networking groups Practice Networking groups Organization International Business Machines IBM Organization International Business Machines IBM Type of Organization Corporation Type yp of Organization Corporation Description IBM wants women to rise to top-level managerial positions The best way to do this is to keep women informed of opportunities and give them access to the people making promotion decisions That’s why the company established a series of networking groups for women There are ad hoc groups that come together at meetings and conferences Another networking group links women in technological positions around the world Description IBM wants women to rise to top-level managerial positions The best p g p way y to do this is to keep p women informed of opportunities pp and ggive p making g ppromotion decisions That’s why y the them access to the ppeople p y established a series of networking g ggroups p for women There company p that come together g g and conferences are ad hoc ggroups at meetings Another networking group links women in technological positions around the world Applicability Provides groups with advice regarding a number of areas including case job assignments and career development Applicability Provides ggroups p with advice regarding g g a number of areas including case job assignments and careerr development Practice Discussion of partnership potential Practice Organization Hogan Hartson Organization Type of Organization Private law firm Type of Organization Description In terms of attorney advancement Hogan Hartson is open and honest by providing an attorney’s standing with regards to achieving partner through a transparent evaluation system The attorney’s partnership potential is evaluated every other evaluation period and feedback is provided to the attorney Description Applicability Provides attorneys with more insight regarding promotions Applicability Discussion of partnership potential Hogan Hartson Private law firm y advancement Hogan g Hartson is open p and honest In terms of attorney p g an attorney’s y standingg with regards g g ppartner byy providing to achieving g a transparent p y y ppartnership p through evaluation system The attorney’s p potential is evaluated every other evaluation period and feedback is provided to the attorney Provides attorneys with more insight regarding promotions ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 117 Profiles of selected best practice organizations DuPont www dupont com · · Received the distinction of having the Sager Award the MCCA’s award for law firms that have demonstrated sustained commitment to improve the hiring retention and promotion of minority attorneys named after Thomas Sager Dupont’s General Counsel Incorporated the DuPont Women Lawyers’ Network which is focused on the development and advancement of women within the company Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field www akingump com · · · · Received the Minority Corporate Counsel Association’s MCCA 2001 Thomas Sager Award Boasts of having 1000 lawyers from diverse backgrounds Of these 1000 Akin Gump lawyers 301 are female 48 are African-American 43 are Hispanic 38 are Asian and 2 are American Indian 56 Ranked as the number 46th law firm in the MinorityLawJournal’s 2000 Diversity Scorecard 57 Rated among the top ten firms nationally for diversity in 2001 www vault com 58 Federal Communications Commission FCC www fcc gov · · Created the Office of Workplace Diversity to promote equal opportunity awareness Listed as one of America’s Best Places to Work with a Law Degree International Paper www internationalpaper com · · · · Created one of the first Diversity Task Teams to promote diversity in the workplace Challenged fellow corporations to champion the cause for diversity by creating the IP Diversity Questionnaire 59 Chosen as the recipient of the National Bar Association Commercial Law Section’s 2001 Corporate Award Selected as a 2001 “Employer of Choice” by MCCA 56 Press Release June 22 2001 Akin Gump Receives Thomas L Sager Award Minority Corporate Counsel Association Recognizes Firm for Promoting Diversity On-line Available http www akingump com news news_2001_6_22_993738571 html 57 American Lawyer Media 2000 2000 Diversity Scorecard On-line MinorityLawJournal Available http www MinorityLawJournal com summer01 texts chart html 58 www akingump com 59 Gavin M Lawyers for One America 2000 Bar None Report to the President of the United States on the Status of People of Color and Pro Bono Services in the Legal Profession San Francisco Lawyers for One America p 56 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 117 Profiles of selected best practice organizations DuPont www dupont com · · Received the distinction of having g the Sager g Award the MCCA’s award for law firms that have demonstrated sustained commitment to improve p g retention and the hiring promotion of minority attorneys named after Thomas Sager Dupont’s General Counsel Incorporated p the DuPont Women Lawyers’ y Network which is focused on the development and advancement of women within the company Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field www akingump com · · · · Received the Minority Corporate Counsel Association’s MCCA 2001 Thomas Sager Award Boasts of havingg 1000 lawyers y from diverse backgrounds g p Of these 1000 Akin Gump lawyers y 301 are female 48 are African-American 43 are Hispanic 38 are Asian and 2 56 are American Indian n 6th law fi ffirm rm in the MinorityLawJournal’s t 2000 Diversity Ranked ass tthe numberr 46 d57 Scorecard Rated among the top ten firms nationally for diversity in 2001 www vault com 58 Federal Communications Commission FCC www fcc gov · · Created the Office of Workplace p Diversity y to ppromote equal q opportunity pp awareness Listed as one of America’s Best Places to Work with a Law Degree International Paper www internationalpaper com · · · · Created one of the first Diversity y Task Teams to promote p diversityy in the workplace p Challenged g fellow corporations p to champion the cause for diversity by creating the IP 59 Diversity Questionnaire e Chosen as the recipient of the National Bar Association Commercial Law Section’s 2001 Corporate Award Selected as a 2001 “Employer of Choice” by MCCA 56 Press Release June 22 2001 Akin Gump p Receives Thomas L Sager Award Minority Corporate Counsel Firm for Association Recognizes g F f Promotingg Diversityy On-line Available g p _ _ _ _ http www akingump com news news_2001_6_22_993738571 html 57 American Lawyer y Media 2 2000 2000 Diversityy ScorecardOn Scorecard d On-line -line MinorityLawJournal M nority Mi tyLawJ wJournal Available y http www MinorityLawJournal com summer01 texts chart html 58 www akingump com g p 59 Gavin M Lawyers L y for One America 2000 Bar None Report p to the President off the United States on the Status off People p of Color and Pro Bono Services in the Legal Profession San Francisco Lawyers for One America p 56 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 118 Microsoft Corporation www microsoft com · · Devotes an entire website to diversity as well as the SGM Model which tracks the progress of diversity within the company Listed as one of the Great Places to Work with a Law Degree Morrison Foerster www mofo com · · Received the Thomas Sager Award in their region by the Minority Corporate Counsel Association MCCA in 2001 Received the 2001 “100 Best Companies for Working Mothers” Award by Working Mother magazine Hogan Hartson www hhlaw com · · · Received the honor of being listed as an organization which demonstrated best practices relating to diversity in the Bar None Report the Report to the President of the United States on the Status of People of Color and Pro Bono Services in the Legal Profession 60 Ranked 1st by the Legal Times 100 for hiring minority and women associates and then making them partner among the D C Metro Area’s 25 Largest Law Offices 61 Ranked 129th in the MinorityLawJournal 2000 Diversity Scorecard 60 Gavin M Lawyers for One America 2000 Bar None Report to the President of the United States on the Status of People of Color and Pro Bono Services in the Legal Profession San Francisco Lawyers for One America 61 2001 Legal Times 100 Minority and Women Lawyers At the D C Metro Area’s 25 Largest Law Offices reproduction On-line Available www hhlaw com ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 118 Microsoft Corporation www microsoft com · · Devotes an entire website to diversity as well as the SGM Model which tracks the progress of diversity within the company Listed as one of the Great Places to Work with a Law Degree Morrison Foerster www mofo com · Received d the Thomas Sager g Award in their region byy the Mino rityy Corpo rate Counsel Minority Corporate Association MCCA in 2001 Received the 2001 “100 Best Companies for Working Mothers” Award by Working W rking Wo Motherr ma gazine magazine · Hogan Hartson www hhlaw com · Received the honor of being listed as an organization which demonstrated best practices relating to diversity in the Bar None Report the Report to the President of the United 60 States onn the t Status of People p of Color and Pro Bono Services in the Legal g Profession st he Legal eg Times Times 100 for hiring g minorityy and women associates es aand then · Ranked d 1 byy tthe making them partner among the D C Metro Area’s 25 Largest Law Offices s61 th · Rankedd 1299 in the MinorityLawJournall 2000 Div Diversity ersityy Sco Scorecard recard 60 Gavin M Lawyers y for One America 2000 Bar None Report p to the President off the United States on the Status of People of Color and Pro Bono Services in the Legal Profession San Francisco Lawyers for One America 61 2001 Legal g Times 100 Minorityy and Women Lawyers y At the D C Metro Area’s 25 Largest Law Offices r reproduction On-line Available www hhlaw com ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 119 Arnold Porter www arnoldporter com · · · · · · · · · · Awarded he MCCA’s 1999 and 2000 Thomas Sager Award Recipient which is the award presented to law firms that have demonstrated sustained commitment to improve the hiring retention and promotion of minority attorneys Awarded the Vault Guide’s number one ranking as the most diverse among the Top 100 Law Firms 62 Honored as one of the ”Best 20 Firms to Work For” in the United States Vault com Ranked as the 57th law firm in the Minority Law Journal 2000 Diversity Scorecard Ranked as the 13th “Firm to Work For” in the nation Vault 2002 Report 63 Received the “100 Best Companies for Working Mothers” Award by Working Mother magazine in 1996 1997 and 2001 Received the 1999 D C Bar’s Pro Bono Law Firm of the Year Award Ranked 16th on the annual list of companies distinguished by their efforts in recognizing the value and needs of working families Listed as one of the “Six Law Firms That Have Raised the Bar When It Comes to Great Benefits and Pay ”64 Received first MCCA’s 2000 Employer of Choice Award which “is designed to spotlight industry leaders who have a commitment to and succeed at creating and maintaining an inclusive corporate legal department ”65 Richard Clarke Associates www diversityrecruiting com · Focuses a particular division of the executive recruiting firm on providing quality minority and women candidates to prospective employers Bell Atlantic www bellatlantic com · Received the MCCA’s 1999 Employer of Choice Award for the Northeast Region 62 2002 Arnold Porter Overview On-line Available http www arnoldporter com 2002 Vault 2001 Survey On-line Available at www vault com Dalphonse Sherri “Great Places to Work ” Washingtonian Oct 2001 95 65 2001 The Employers of Choice Awards On-line Available http www mcca com site data corporate EmployersofChoice index html 63 64 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 119 Arnold Porter www arnoldporter com · · · · · · · · · · Awarded he MCCA’s 1999 and 2000 Thomas Sager g Award Recipient p which is the award ppresented to law firms that have demonstrated sustained commitment to improve the hiring retention and promotion of minority attorneys Awarded tthee Vault Guide’s number one ranking as the most diverse among the Top 100 Law Firms s62 Honored as one of the ”Best 20 Firms to Work For” in the United States Vault com th Ranked as the 57 7 law firm in the Minorityy Law Journall 2000 Diversity y Scorecard th Ranked as the 13 3 “Firm to Work For” in the nation Vault 2002 Report p 63 Received the “100 Best Companies p for Working Mothers” Award by Working Mother magazine in 1996 1997 and 2001 Received the 1999 D C Bar’s Pro Bono Law Firm of the Year Award th Rankedd 16 6 on the annual list of companies p distinguished by their efforts in recognizing the value and needs of working families Listed as one of the “Six Law Firms That Have Raised the Bar When It Comes to Great ” Benefits and Pay ”64 Received first MCCA’s 2000 Employer p y of Choice Award which “is designed g to spotlight p g industry y leaders who have a commitment to and succeed at creating and maintaining an 65 5 inclusive corporate legal department ”” Richard Clarke Associates www diversityrecruiting com · Focuses a pparticular division of the executive recruitingg firm on providing quality minority and women candidates to prospective employers Bell Atlantic www bellatlantic c www bellatlantic com · Received the MCCA’s 1999 Employer of Choice Award for the Northeast Region 62 2002 Arnold Porter Overview On-line Available http www arnoldporter com p 2002 Vault 2001 Survey Survey y On-line y On-line Available at www vault com Dalphonse p Sherri i ““Grea “Great at Places to Work ” Washingtonian g Oct 2001 95 655 2001 The Employers p y of Choice Awards On-line Available http www mcca com site data corporate EmployersofChoice index html 63 64 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 120 3 4 3 Conclusion to benchmarking and best practices findings This section of the report has provided DOJ with benchmarking results among other federal agency attorney workforces and an extensive list of best practices regarding diversity from other federal agencies private law firms and corporations An overarching theme that has emerged from the research of these organizations is that their best practices are derived from a very open and flexible environment The organizations’ diversity initiatives are publicized and open to discussion thus lessening any misperceptions steering the workforce It is important to remember that many of these best practices are not limited to an attorney workforce Therefore the Department must approach each in its respective context Through tailoring and creativity however the Department can utilize many of these best practices ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 120 3 4 3 Conclusion to benchmarking and best practices findings p has pprovided DOJ with benchmarkingg results amongg other federal This section of the report g y attorneyy workforces and an extensive list off best ppractices regarding g g diversity y from other agency g pprivate law firms and corporations p An overarchingg theme that has emerged g federal agencies g y open p from the research of these organizations is that their best ppractices are derived from a very g diversity y initiatives are ppublicized and open p to and flexible environment The organizations’ p p p discussion thus lesseningg anyy misperceptions steeringg the workforce It is important to e e be that t at many a y of o these t ese best practices p act ces are a e not ot limited ted to an a attorney atto ey workforce wo o ce Therefore eeoe remember the Department p must approach pp each in its respective p context Through tailoring and creativity however the Department can utilize many of these best practices ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 121 4 Recommendations ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 121 4 Recommendations This section provides our recommendations For most recommendations responsibility for implementation will vary between the Litigating Divisions U S Attorneys’ Offices and other components In most cases the Department should develop a high-level framework and then allow components to tailor the solution within that framework and any key constraints identified This section pprovides our recommendations For most recommendations responsibility p y for implementation p will varyy between the Litigating g g Divisions U S Attorneys’ y Offices and other components p p g framework and then In most cases the Department should developp a high-level allow components to tailor the solution within that framework and any key constraints identified Each of these recommendations would require resources to implement The Department and components must make the best use of their budgets and time but we believe that these recommendations would be warranted given the importance of diversity and the significant benefits to be derived Each of these recommendations would require q resources to implement p p The Department and components p must make the best use of their budgets g and time but we believe that these recommendations would be warranted given the importance of diversity and the significant benefits to be derived As discussed in section 2 4 we used the Taylor Cox Associates change model to formulate these recommendations We have described the recommendations within the context of the five areas of the model As discussed in section 2 4 we used the Taylor y r Cox Associates chan gge model to formulate change these recommendations We have described the recommendations within the context of the five areas of the model 4 1 Leadership 4 1 Leadership 4 1 1 Demonstrate AG DAG-level commitment to and communication of diversity issues and solutions 4 1 1 Demonstrate AG DAG-level commitment to and communication of diversity issues and solutions In any organization leadership from the very top levels is required to implement the kind of cultural change required to improve its diversity climate This is especially true for DOJ given the diffuse nature of the Department and the difficulty of implementing cultural change across a major federal government department In any y organization g leadership p from the very y topp levels is required q to implement p the kind of cultural change g required q to improve p its diversity y climate This is especially p y true for DOJ ggiven the diffuse nature of the Department an and the difficulty of implementing cultural change across a major federal government department Longer-term the following steps should be part of the leadership effort Longer-term the following steps should be part of the leadership effort § § § Integrate the work on diversity with the Department’s strategic planning process Lead communications to further establish the diversity effort as a Department priority Promote accountability for diversity such as raising it in meetings in which performance on key DOJ goals is reviewed § § § g y with the Department’s p g pplanning g pprocess Integrate the work on diversity strategic y effort as a Department p priority Lead communications to further establish the diversity y for diversity y such as raising it in meetings in which Promote accountability performance on key DOJ goals is reviewed The fact that the current top political leadership of the Department is diverse sends an important positive message as the beginning of management’s leadership strategy The fact that the current top p ppolitical leadership p of the Department p is diverse sends an important positive message as the beginning of management’s leadership strategy 4 1 2 Identify levers to implement change 4 1 2 Identify levers to implement change The AG and DAG must be cognizant of the organizational structure as they lead change They must also exert leverage vis-à-vis the AAGs or the equivalent The AG and DAG must be cognizant g of the organizational g structure as they lead change They must also exert leverage vis-à-vis the AAGs or the equivalent The Department should address the impact that Section Chiefs in the Litigating Divisions have on the work climate given their control over recruitment selection promotion award allocation job assignment and other career development activities and performance appraisal the low turnover in their ranks their general resistance to change and the fact that their ranks are less diverse especially with respect to race than the attorney workforce as a whole The Department p should address the impact p that Section Chiefs in the Litigating g g Divisions have on the work climate ggiven their control over recruitment selection ppromotion award allocation jjob assignment g and other career development p activities and performance p appraisal pp the low turnover tu ove in their t e ranks a s their t e general ge e a resistance es sta ce to change c a ge aand d tthee fact act tthat at ttheir e ranks are less diverse especially with respect to race than the attorney workforce as a whole ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 122 Two plausible ways to address this area are to re-cast the role of Section Chiefs and or re-train them Although Section Chiefs’ roles are defined by the fact that they are held accountable for the performance of their Sections there are elements of their jobs that can be re-cast for example by distributing management decision-making—especially hiring and case assignment—more broadly DOJ should also offer management and diversity training to existing Section Chiefs The Civil Rights Division has been able to use the occasions when its attorney workforce has grown to increase the number of minorities in leadership positions without impacting the current management workforce With the substantial upcoming growth in the Criminal Division the Department should remain aware of this opportunity to increase diversity without requiring turnover and take advantage of it 4 2 Research and Measurement ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 122 Two pplausible ways y to address this area are to re-cast the role of Section Chiefs and or re-train them Although g Section Chiefs’ roles are defined byy the fact that theyy are held accountable for the pperformance of their Sections there are elements of their jjobs that can be re-cast for example byy distributing g management g g p y hiringg and case assignment—more g decision-making—especially g to existing Section Chiefs broadly DOJ should also offer management and diversityy trainin training g Division has been able to use the occasions when its attorneyy workforce has The Civil Rights g p ppositions without impacting p g the current grown to increase the number of minorities in leadership g workforce With the substantial upcoming p g ggrowth in the Criminal Division the management p should remain aware of this opportunityy to incre ase diversityy w ithout requiring Department increase without turnover and take advantage off it 4 2 Research and Measurement 4 2 1 Create a measurement plan for diversity 4 2 1 Create a measurement plan for diversity Once the top leadership of the Department has articulated the imperative to manage diversity it along with component leadership must create plans to measure the results The Department should develop comprehensive measurement strategies It should then map the results to component-level measures and charge component heads with supplementing the list with their own measures p leadership p of the Department p p g diversity y it Once the top has articulated the imperative to manage g with component p p must create pplans to measure the results The Department p along leadership p measurement strategies g It should then map p the results to should developp comprehensive p measures and charge componentt heads with supplementing the list with their component-level own measures Following are several examples of measurements that might be implemented by component Following are several examples of measurements that might be implemented by component nt Component Litigating Divisions and Executive Office for Immigration Review U S Attorneys’ Offices and U S Trustees Bureau of Prisons and Immigration and Naturalization Service Measurements § Composition of entire workforce GS-15 workforce and SES workforce by race and gender compared to labor force § Recent attrition by race and gender § Recent Honors Program hiring by race and gender § Recent lateral hiring by race and gender § Job satisfaction and organizational identification by race and gender § Composition of entire workforce by race and gender compared to supervisory workforce § Recent attrition by race and gender § Recent lateral hiring by race and gender § Job satisfaction and organizational identification by race and gender § Composition of entire workforce by race and gender compared to supervisory workforce § Recent attrition by race and gender § Recent Honors Program hiring by race and gender § Recent lateral hiring by race and gender § Job satisfaction and organizational identification by race and gender The measurement approach should include modeling of how attitudinal factors—such as job satisfaction—serve as leading indicators of lower performance attrition and other adverse outcomes Compon Component p ent Litigating g g Divisions and Executive Office for Immigration Review U S Attorneys’ y Offices and U S Trustees Bureau of Prisons and Immigration g and Naturalization Service Measurements GS 15 workforce workforce § Composition of entire workforce GS-15 and SES w workforce by race and gender compared to labor force § Recent attrition by race and gende gender § Recent Honors Program hiring by race and gender gende § Recent lateral hiring by race and gender § Job satisfaction and organizational identification by gende race and ggender § Composition of entire workforce bby race and gender workforc compared to supervisory workforce § Recent attrition by race and gende gender § Recent lateral hiring by race and gender gende § Job satisfaction and organizational identification by race and ggender gende § Composition of entire workforce bby race and gender compared to supervisory workforce workforc § Recent attrition by race and gende gender § Recent Honors Program hiring by race and gender § Recent lateral hiring by race and gender gende § Job satisfaction and organizational identification by race and gender The measurement approach pp should include modeling g of how attitudinal factors—such as job j satisfaction—serve as leading indicators of lower performance attrition and other adverse outcomes outcomes ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 123 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 123 4 2 2 Create a performance measurement system to increase management awareness of and accountability for diversity 4 2 2 Create a performance measurement system to increase management awareness of and accountability for diversity What gets measured gets done Simply making managers aware of where they stand in the area of diversity will be a significant step in improving it Based on the measurement plan described above the Department should prepare reports detailing the diversity of the attorney workforce within each component and distribute the results periodically to component heads In turn component heads should distribute results within each of their Sections Districts geographic offices or equivalent of diversity y will be a significant g step p in improving p g it Based on the measurement pplan described should prepare detailing workforce above the Department p p p reports p g the diversityy of the attorneyy work force within each component p and distribute the results pperiodicallyy to component p heads In turn component p heads should distribute results within each of their Sections Districts geographic offices or equivalent Such data accompanied by periodic messages from the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General affirming the importance of diversity will provide managers a framework in which to act We find that no manager wants to be at the bottom of a list ranking organizational units according to some criterion that top management finds important Furthermore it is likely that component heads and Section Chiefs would be surprised at how low their diversity is Such data accompanied p by y pperiodic messages g from the Attorneyy General and Deputy p y Attorney y General affirming g the importance p of diversity y will provide p managers g a framework in which to act We find that no manager g wants to be at the bottom of a list rankingg organizational g units according g to some criterion that topp management g finds important p Furthermore it is likely that component heads and Section Chiefs would be surprised at how low their diversity is This data could be collected and disseminated beginning immediately Over time production and dissemination should become routinized in a performance measurement system and the topic discussed periodically e g quarterly at management meetings This data could be collected and disseminated d beginning g g immediately y Over time pproduction and dissemination should become routinized in a performance p measurement system and the topic discussed periodically e g quarterly at management meetings The performance measurement system should store the performance measures for the surveys— for example quarterly scores by race and gender to reflect various key elements of the climate like the organizational identification job involvement and career satisfaction indicators of the survey that we used for this study —as well as organizational outcomes such as turnover Management should scrutinize the figures and discuss individualized problems with the relevant component or Section head The pperformance measurement system y should store the pperformance measures for the surveys— y for example p qquarterly y scores by y race and ggender to reflect various keyy elements of the climate like the organizational g j involvement and career satisfaction indicators of the identification job surveyy that we used for this study —as y well as organizational g outcomes such as turnover Management g should scrutinize the figures and discuss individualized problems with the relevant component or Section head Additionally the Department should collect more data elements than it does now It should store data on applicant flow for lateral hires where possible some components such as the Antitrust Division do this now more information about pre-DOJ legal experience and attorneys’ performance ratings Additionally y the Department p should collect more data elements than it does now It should store data on applicant pp flow for lateral hires where ppossible some components p such as the Antitrust Division do this now more information aboutt pre-DOJ legal experience and attorneys’ performance ratings Many private law firms and corporate general counsels have taken incremental steps to increase accountability regarding their diversity initiatives through the use of diversity questionnaires see International Paper and Hogan Hartson in the “Best Practices” section These forms or “cultural audits” as OPM defines them provide attorneys and outside interests with information on many topics including diversity recruiting efforts attorney demographic totals and case assignments This practice has helped to lessen perception problems within their organizations with regard to diversity DOJ can adapt this practice in every component and on a Section-bySection basis The respective Section Chief can then funnel this information to the Executive Office every quarter or six months for a department-wide analysis By disseminating such data management is held accountable for their diversity initiatives by both their peers and the attorney workforce Manyy private p law firms and corporate p ggeneral counsels have taken incremental steps p to increase g g their diversityy initiatives through g the use of diversityy questionnaires q accountabilityy regarding see International Paper p and Hogan g Hartson in the “Best Practices” section These forms or “cultural audits” as OPM defines them pprovide attorneys y and outside interests with information y topics p includingg diversityy recruiting g efforts attorneyy demographic g p totals and case on many g This ppractice has helped p to lessen pperception p pproblems within their organizations g assignments g y DOJ can adapt p this practice p y component p and on a Section-byy with regard to diversity in every p Section Chief can then funnel this information to the Executive Section basis The respective p analysis y By y disseminating g such data Office everyy qquarter or six months for a department-wide g management is held accountable for their diversity initiatives by both their peers and the attorney workforce ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 124 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 124 4 2 3 Conduct a study of case assignment processes to increase likelihood of fairness 4 2 3 Conduct a study of case assignment processes to increase likelihood of fairness The Department should conduct a study of who is assigned to cases in order to either corroborate or refute the claims of inequities in case assignment The Department p g should conduct a studyy of who is assigned to cases in order to either corroborate or refute the claims off inequities in case assignment The Department should ask Section Chiefs or their equivalent to analyze the difficulty—in terms of complexity novelty publicity or other relevant criteria—of each current or recent case It should then separately ascertain which attorney s are assigned to lead and work on the case It should then correlate these results with the difficulty rating to see if there are race or gender effects When collecting the information about case difficulty managers must not know the purpose for the data collection or else they may not report accurately should ask Section Chiefs or The Department p their equivalent q to analyze y the difficulty—in y terms of complexity p y novelty y publicity p y or other relevant criteria—of each current or recent case It should then separately p y ascertain which attorney s y are assigned g to lead and work on the case It should then correlate these results with the difficultyy ratingg to see if there are race or ggender effects When collecting g the information aboutt case difficulty y managers g must not know the purpose for the data collection or else they may not report accurately If there are race or gender effects then these should be addressed with the Chiefs If not then the results should be publicized across the Department If there are race or ggender effects then these should be addressed with the Chiefs If not then the results should be publicized across the Department In parallel DOJ should study different Sections’ case assignment processes in detail and determine whether best practices could be more widely applied In pparallel DOJ should study y different Sections’ case assignment g processes in detail and determine whether best practices could be more widely applied 4 2 4 Administer exit surveys 4 2 4 Administer exit surveys In order to determine why attorneys leave DOJ the Department should administer pointed exit surveys of attorneys who leave voluntarily Questions should be developed to parallel the climate findings revealed in this study The survey could be conducted overseen by the EEO Staff OARM or the Office of the Deputy Attorney General In order to determine whyy attorneys y leave DOJ the Department p should administer ppointed exit surveys y of attorneys y who leave voluntarily y Q Questions should be developed p to pparallel the climate findings g revealed in this study y The surveyy could be conducted overseen by the EEO Staff OARM or the Office of the Deputy Attorney General The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry CDC ATSDR has employed exit surveys to analyze employee retention patterns and create practices to address any problematic findings see section 3 4 2 These programs as well as the academic literature on the subject can provide a good deal of insight g y for Toxic Substances and Disease The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Agency g y CDC ATSDR has employed p y exit surveys y to analyze y employee p y retention ppatterns and Registry y pproblematic findings g see section 3 4 2 These programs as well create ppractices to address any as the academic literature on the subject can provide a good deal of insight 4 2 5 Administer attitudinal surveys on an ongoing basis 4 2 5 Administer attitudinal surveys on an ongoing basis As the Department implements the recommendations discussed in this report it should administer surveys such as the one we used in this study to test the success of the programs implemented and support analysis of correlation with organizational outcomes p implements p the recommendations discussed in this report p it should As the Department y such as the one we used in this studyy to test the success of the programs administer surveys implemented and support analysis of correlation with organizational outcomes As discussed in recommendation 2 1 DOJ should construct statistical models which tie attrition and other adverse patterns to survey results to be able to diagnose and correct climate problems sooner and possibly prevent attrition For example DOJ should attempt to obtain a sufficient sample size of responses within each Section in the Litigating Divisions and tie the survey findings and findings from the exit surveys described above to Section-level patterns of attorney performance and attrition including by race and gender Such an exercise would enable the Department to determine which elements of the work climate drive attrition most and focus its efforts on improving those elements As discussed in recommendation 2 1 DOJ should construct statistical models which tie attrition y results to be able to diagnose g and other adverse ppatterns to survey and correct climate pproblems y pprevent attrition For example p DOJ should attempt p to obtain a sufficient sooner and ppossibly p size of responses p within each Section in the Litigating g g Divisions and tie the survey sample g and g from the exit surveys y described above to Section-level ppatterns of findings findings p g attorneyy performance and attrition includingg byy race and gender Such an exercise would enable p the Department to determine which elements of the work climate drive attrition most and focus its efforts on improving those elements ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 125 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 125 4 3 HR Systems 4 3 HR Systems 4 3 1 Implement a comprehensive career development process 4 3 1 Implement a comprehensive career development process Good diversity management begins with good human resources management This is especially true considering that women and minorities express lower job satisfaction than men and whites and are also more likely to leave the Department DOJ should make career development a stated part of managers’ job descriptions and conduct periodic attitudinal surveys and exit surveys as discussed above to assess success Good diversityy management management g begins g with good g a resources resources management g This is especially p y human true r consideringg that women and minorities express p lowerr jjob sa tisfa f ction than men and whites satisfaction and are also more likelyy tto o leave the Department p DOJ should make career development p a stated part of managers’ managers job descriptions and conduct periodic attitudinal surveys and exit surveys as discussed above to assess success Equally important the Department should include an evaluation of one’s promise as a manager in selection decisions for management jobs Additionally it should nurture potential future managers by instilling in them good management practices and exposing them to management activities throughout their careers q y important p the Department p t should include an evaluation of one’s ppromise as a manager Equally g jjobs Additionally y it should nurture r p future in selection decisions for management potential g by y instillingg in them good g managers managementt practices and exposing them to management activities throughout their careers The Department should also implement formal career-development tools such as The Department should also implement formal career-development tools such as § § § § self-assessment tools to help attorneys plan their careers databases to help them learn of opportunities to match their interests individual career development plans and career counseling y pplan their careers § self-assessment tools to helpp attorneys p them learn of opportunities pp § databases to help to match their interests § individual career development plans and § careerr counseling The Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General should communicate these changes in policy to components and establish an ongoing career development communications plan The Attorney y General and Deputy p y Attorney y General should communicate these changes in policy to components and establish an ongoing career development communications plan 4 3 2 Implement a performance management process with more than two levels 4 3 2 Implement a performance management process with more than two levels The Department should abolish the “pass” “fail” performance management system in favor of a system with at least three levels More important than the development of the system the Department should do more to make sure that it is used conscientiously Managers should be held accountable for having candid value-adding discussions with attorney staff at least once a year They should be scored on the percentage of employees they supervise who underwent the process and any figure less than 100% should be scrutinized by upper management Upper management should also lead by example and regularly evaluate managers Additionally each staff attorney should have a “performance manager” who is to some degree accountable for the staff member’s performance The Department p p p g y should abolish the “pass” “fail” performance management system in favor of a system y p r p of the system y the with at least three levels More important than the development Department p should do more to make sure that it is used conscientiously y Managers g should be held accountable for havingg candid value-adding g discussions with attorneyy staff at least once a yyear Theyy should be scored on the percentage p g of employees p y y supervise p they who underwent the pprocess and anyy figure g y upper pp management g Upper pp less than 100% should be scrutinized by management g p and regularly g y evaluate managers g Additionally y each should also lead byy example staff attorney y should have a “performance manager” who is to some degree accountable for the staff member’s pperformance The Department should develop performance criteria for each of the levels based upon job grade Criteria should consist of some elements that are the same for all attorneys and others that are component- or Section-specific The Department p p f p jjob ggrade should developp performance criteria for each of the levels based upon Criteria should consist of some elements that are the same for all attorneys and others that are component- or Section-specific 4 3 3 Develop and promulgate consistent processes for human resources systems 4 3 3 Develop and promulgate consistent processes for human resources systems Through development and promulgation of consistent standards and policies for performance appraisal the Department will mitigate some of the concern about transparency of HR practices It should continue to engage attorneys in dialogue solicit their input into the HR policies and hold managers accountable for explaining their approach to recruitment selection promotion Through g development p g and ppromulgation of consistent standards and ppolicies for pperformance appraisal pp the Department p will mitigate g some of the concern aboutt transparency p y of HR ppractices It should continue to engage g g attorneys y in dialogue g solicit their input p into the HR ppolicies and hold managers accountable for explaining their approach to recruitment selection promotion ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 126 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 126 award allocation job assignment and other career development activities and performance appraisal for attorneys under their supervision award allocation job j assignment g t and other career developm development ent activities and performance appraisal for attorneys under their supervision One way to reduce the perceptions about a lack of transparency in HR practices is to have a committee sometimes called “work life committees ” comprised of attorneys at all levels in each component office or Section The committee would make recommendations about management practices that could substantively improve processes One way y to reduce the pperceptions p about a lack off transparency p y in HR ppractices is to have a committee sometimes called “work life committees ” comprised p of attorneys y at all levels in each component p office or Section The committee would make recommendations about management practices that could substantively improve processes The Department should also expand hiring committees to include all levels of staff especially in those components or offices in which the current selection committee—e g in many sections a group of Section Chiefs—is not diverse with respect to race or gender The Department p p p y in should also expand hiringg committees to include all levels of staff especially those components p or offices in which the current selection committee—e g in many sections a group of Section Chiefs—is not diverse with respect to race or gender 4 3 4 Leverage lessons learned from the Honors Program for lateral recruitment and implement more creative sourcing techniques 4 3 4 Leverage g lessons learned from the Honors Program for lateral recruitment and implement more creative sourcing techniques Although we did not have the ability to evaluate the success of Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program LARP in the aggregate we believe that its principles were well-conceived LARP did not and any successor should not attempt to take discretion for making hiring decisions away from components—rather it should provide components with more tools to increase the diversity of their applicant pools accountability for following through and hiring a diverse workforce will be covered by the performance reporting process described in recommendation 2 1 A centralized lateral recruitment program should incorporate the following elements Although g we did not have the abilityy to evaluate the success of Lateral Attorney y Recruitment Program g LARP in the aggregate gg g we believe that its principles p p were well-conceived LARP did not and anyy successor should not attempt p to take discretion for making g hiring g decisions away from components—rather p it should provide p mp components with more tools to increase the diversityy of their applicant pp ppools accountability y for followingg through g and hiring g a diverse workforce will be covered byy the performance p reporting p g pprocess described in recommendation 2 1 A centralized lateral recruitment program should incorporate the following elements § § § § § Centralized marketing of DOJ job openings in which components can participate to increase the breadth of advertising without bearing unwieldy costs Raising “brand awareness” of the Department as a place to work in the legal community Outreach to sources with a diverse composition including minority bar associations conferences and publications Centralized mail and e-mail addresses and fax number where candidates know that they can send resumes and an individual on the receiving end who will collect the resumes and send them to the relevant components Better data collection on vacancies applicants and their source and offers and hires § § § § § Centralized marketing g of DOJ jjob openings p g in which components p can participate to increase the breadth of advertisingg without bearing g unwieldy y costs Raisingg “brand awareness” of the Department as a place to work in the legal community y Outreach to sources with a diverse composition including minority bar associations conferences and ppublications Centralized mail and e-mail addresses and fax number where candidates know that they y can send resumes resumes and an individual on the receiving rece end who will collect the resumes and send them to the relevant components p Better data collection on vacancies applicants and their source and offers and hires Components could do better analysis to plan for lateral vacancies If they analyzed attrition at the component or Section level for the recent past it is probable that they could discern trends that would enable them to predict future vacancies with a reasonable degree of confidence Additionally through OARM or whichever office administers the lateral recruitment program they could collaborate with other components to project hiring needs several months in advance across an even broader segment of DOJ That way if fewer vacancies than expected occur in any one component attorneys hired through the program could be placed somewhere else in the Department Components p y to pplan for lateral vacancies If they y analyzed y attrition at could do better analysis the component p or Section level for the recent ppast it is pprobable that they y could discern trends that would enable them to ppredict future vacancies with a reasonable degree g of confidence Additionally y through g OARM or whichever office administers the lateral recruitment program p g theyy could collaborate with other components p to pproject j hiring g needs several months in advance across an even broader segment g of DOJ That way y if fewer vacancies than expected p occur in any y one component attorneys hired through the program could be placed somewhere else in the Department An additional administrative step that could be employed for all unsolicited resumes received is to send the candidate an application form to fill out prior to being considered The form could ask how the candidate heard about employment opportunities at DOJ as well as his her An additional administrative stepp that could be employed p y for all unsolicited resumes received is to send the candidate an application pp form to fill out prior p to beingg considered The form could ask how the candidate heard about employmentt opportunities at DOJ as well as his her ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 127 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 127 demographic information The volume of resumes received combined with the burden of processing and storing them as well as tracking future outcomes of the recruiting process tied to the candidate forms make this task unwieldy and probably not cost-effective at this time However as the Department upgrades its technology it could consider adding functionality to handle this task demographic g p information The volume of resumes received combined with the burden of pprocessing g and storing g them as well as tracking g future outcomes of the recruiting g pprocess tied to the candidate forms make this task unwieldy y and pprobably y not cost-effective at this time However as the Department upgrades its technology it could consider adding functionality to handle this task DOJ should also pay more attention to developing interest in those sections of the law—e g antitrust tax environment and bankruptcy—in which it perceives that the labor pool for that practice area is not as diverse as the legal labor pool as a whole Techniques for such outreach could include seminars targeted toward younger law students or even undergraduates or rotational programs for Honors Program entrants as long as the quality of assignments was not reduced The Department should partner with the American Bar Association National Bar Association private firms and other industry groups in conducting such outreach Examples of past programs in which DOJ has participated or might wish to participate include p y more attention to developing p g interest in those sections of the law—e g g DOJ should also pay p y which it pperceives that the labor ppool for that antitrust tax environment and bankruptcy—in p area is not as diverse as the legal g labor ppool as a whole Techniques q for such outreach practice g y g law students or even undergraduates g or could include seminars targeted toward younger g for Honors Program g entrants as long g as the qquality y of assignments g was not rotational pprograms The Department p should ppartner with the American Bar Association National Bar reduced y ggroups p in conducting g such outreach Examples of Association pprivate firms and other industry past programs in which DOJ has participated or might wish to participate include § § The ABA Section on Antitrust Law and OARM collaborated to hold seminars on antitrust law at law schools The ABA arranged for guest speakers and OARM recruited for the Honors Program The ABA Section of Environment Energy and Resources Law provides a fellowship for interns in the field The program is focused on diversity § § The ABA Section on Antitrust Law and OARM collaborated to hold seminars on antitrust law at law schools The ABA arranged for guest speakers and OARM recruited for the Honors Program g The ABA Section of Environment Energy gy and Resources Law provides a fellowship for interns in the field The program is focused on diversity Individual components should give more consideration to otherwise promising attorneys who may not have expertise in their specific field of law Many participants in the study agreed that basic attorney skills are transferable across components and that individuals can develop the expertise in a particular subject matter with the proper training provided The Department should make more opportunities including assistant section chief and similar jobs available to DOJ attorneys in other components placing more general advertisements and spending a bit more effort to develop new lateral hires’ expertise in the field where necessary Individual components p g more consideration to otherwise ppromising g attorneys y who should give mayy not have expertise p in their specific p field of law Many y pparticipants p in the study y agreed g that basic attorneyy skills are transferable across components p and that individuals can developp the expertise p in a pparticular subject j matter with the pproper p trainingg pprovided The Department p should make more opportunities pp includingg assistant section chief and similar jjobs available to DOJ attorneys y in other components p placing p g more general g advertisements and spending a bit more effort to develop new lateral hires’ expertise in the field where necessary These practices could be pilot-tested in the Criminal Division which is in the process of hiring approximately 80 experienced attorneys These practices p could be ppilot-tested in the Criminal Division which is in the process of hiring approximately 80 experienced attorneys 4 3 5 Disseminate vacancy information across components 4 3 5 Disseminate vacancy information across components As discussed above components should advertise vacancies especially for Assistant Chief and other management positions across the Department This will create the perception and the reality of more opportunity for female and minority attorneys The Department should create a simple bulletin on its intranet that components can use to reach attorneys elsewhere in the Department As discussed above components p p y for Assistant Chief and should advertise vacancies especially other management g ppositions across the Department p p p This will create the perception and the realityy of more opportunity pp y for female and minorityy attorneys y The Department p should create a simple p bulletin on its intranet that components can use to reach attorneys elsewhere in the Department DOJ can adapt a principle like Microsoft Pathways see section 3 4 2 to address vacancy announcements and other issues such as recruitment Such availability of data will provide employees with greater opportunities in an open environment DOJ can adapt p a pprinciple p like Microsoft f Pathways y see s section 3 4 2 to address vacancy y announcements and other issues such as recruitment Such availability of data will provide employees with greater opportunities in an open environment ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 128 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 128 4 3 6 Further develop mentoring capabilities 4 3 6 Further develop mentoring capabilities Our experience with mentoring programs suggests that the best program is one in which senior attorneys formally devote significant attention to this task Each new hire should ideally be assigned a pair of mentors one of the same gender and or racial identity and one of a different identity for three years The Department should evaluate resources to determine the feasibility of such an effort Most importantly an attorney should have at least one mentor who is in a position of power and has volunteered to serve in such a capacity Mentors should be trained and provided with guidelines Such guidance is available through OPM and through private organizations Mentors and mentees should also evaluate their experiences yearly and the Department should make program improvements and individual reassignments based on the results Our experience p with mentoring g pprograms g suggests gg that the best pprogram g is one in which senior attorneys y formally y devote significant g attention to this task Each new hire should ideallyy be assigned g p of mentors one of the same ggender and or racial identityy and one of a different a pair identity y for three years y The Department p should evaluate resources to determine the feasibility of such an effort Most importantly p y an attorneyy should have at least one mentor who is in a pposition of power p p y Mentors should be trained and and has volunteered to serve in such a capacity pprovided with gguidelines Such gguidance is available through g OPM and through g pprivate organizations g p y y and the Mentors and mentees should also evaluate their experiences yearly Department p should make program improvements and individual reassignments based on the results A formal mentor program could be pilot-tested in a component like the Civil Division which is fairly representative of the Department in climate and diversity outcomes Civil Division leadership has also already begun to consider some of the career development steps discussed in this section Over time results should be analyzed alongside attitudinal survey results to ascertain the effects of mentoring on employees’ career outlook g could be pilot-tested p in a component p like the Civil Division which is A formal mentor pprogram y representative p of the Department p in climate and diversity y outcomes Civil Division fairly p has also already y begun g to consider some of the career development p steps p discussed in leadership y alongside g attitudinal survey results to this section Over time results should be analyzed ascertain the effects of mentoring on employees’ career outlook 4 3 7 Appoint diversity advocates in each component 4 3 7 Appoint diversity advocates in each component In addition to more structured mentoring each component should have a diversity advocate who is an attorney This advocate can provide knowledgeable guidance to attorneys serve as an ombudsman to address disputes and continue to ensure that the component is cognizant of diversity issues g each component p should have a diversity y advocate who In addition to more structured mentoring y This advocate can provide p g g y serve as an is an attorney knowledgeable guidance to attorneys ombudsman to address disputes and continue to ensure that the component is cognizant of diversity issues 4 4 Education 4 4 Education 4 4 1 Training for leaders to mitigate climate issues 4 4 1 Training for leaders to mitigate climate issues Training focusing on the details of stereotyping and other subtle forms of identity-related employment bias would help managers mitigate the work climate effects cited by minorities g focusing g on the details of stereotyping yp g and other subtle forms of identity-related y Training employment bias would help managers mitigate the work climate effects cited by minorities 4 4 2 Training on the organizational change model 4 4 2 Training on the organizational change model Key managers who will be proponents of the change initiative should be trained on the theory and application of the change model y managers g who will be pproponents p of the change initiative should be trained on the theory Key and application of the change model 4 5 Follow-up and Accountability 4 5 Follow-up and Accountability 4 5 1 Base awards on adherence to the measurement plan 4 5 1 Base awards on adherence to the measurement plan Once the Department implements the performance measurement system described above over time components will develop proven strategies to solve common diversity problems As they do the Department should also collect store and report accounting of these strategies Eventually the AG and DAG should mandate adoption of these strategies and base awards on adherence p implements p the pperformance measurement system y described above over Once the Department p p g to solve common diversity y pproblems As they time components will developp proven strategies p p accounting g of these strategies g do the Department should also collect store and report y the AG and DAG should mandate adoption of these strategies and base awards on Eventually adherence ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 129 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE 129 4 5 2 Give visibility to diversity-related metrics 4 5 2 Give visibility to diversity-related metrics The DAG has already taken the first step by communicating his interest in diversity Next the Department should increase public visibility of the matter by incorporating diversity goals in its Government Performance and Results Act reporting and implementing such tools as the NALP Law Firm Questionnaire see Best Practices Recruiting The DAG has alreadyy taken the first step p by y communicatingg his interest in diversity y Next the Department p should increase ppublic visibility y of the matter by y incorporating p g diversity y ggoals in its Government Performance and Results Act reporting p g and implementing such tools as the NALP Law Firm Questionnaire see Best Practices Recruiting ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE A-1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE A-1 Appendix A Interview Focus Group and Employee Survey Questions Appendix A Interview Focus Group and Employee Survey Questions Interview and focus groups questions Interview and focus groups questions Note For individual interviews the moderator recorded the “yes” or “no” response where applicable For focus groups the moderator recorded a consensus “yes” or “no” if there was one Note For individual interviews the moderator recorded the “yes” or “no” response where applicable For focus groups the moderator recorded a consensus “yes” or “no” if there was one 1 Describe the culture most noticeable characteristics of the work climate in your own words 1 Describe the culture most noticeable characteristics of the work climate in your own words 2 Do you believe that men and women have equal opportunity to be hired here 2 Do you believe that men and women have equal opportunity to be hired here YES YES NO NO Explain your answer what indicators cause you to answer as you have Explain your answer what indicators cause you to answer as you have Follow up Are there things about the recruiting process that make it more difficult for one gender versus the other to be hired Follow up Are there things about the recruiting process that make it more difficult for one gender versus the other to be hired 3 Do you believe that people of all racial ethnic backgrounds have equal opportunity to be hired here 3 Do you believe that people of all racial ethnic backgrounds have equal opportunity to be hired here YES YES NO NO Explain your answer what indicators cause you to answer as you have Explain your answer what indicators cause you to answer as you have Follow-up Are there things about the recruiting process that make it more difficult for people of one race ethnic group versus others to be hired Follow-up Are there things about the recruiting process that make it more difficult for people of one race ethnic group versus others to be hired 4 Is there equal opportunity for both men and women to be promoted here 4 Is there equal opportunity for both men and women to be promoted here YES YES NO NO Explain your answer what indicators cause you to answer as you have Explain your answer what indicators cause you to answer as you have Follow-up Are there things about the process for promotions that make it more difficult for one gender versus the other to be advanced to higher job grades Follow-up Are there things about the process for promotions that make it more difficult for one gender versus the other to be advanced to higher job grades ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE A-2 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE A-2 5 Is there equal opportunity for people of all racial ethnic groups to be promoted here 5 Is there equal opportunity for people of all racial ethnic groups to be promoted here YES YES NO NO Explain your answer what indicators cause you to answer as you have Explain your answer what indicators cause you to answer as you have Follow-up Are there things about the process for promotions that make it more difficult for one race ethnic group versus others to be advanced to higher job grades Follow-up Are there things about the process for promotions that make it more difficult for one race ethnic group versus others to be advanced to higher job grades 6 Do you believe that you have the same opportunity to participate in the best projects or work assignments as others of similar education and experience 6 Do you believe that you have the same opportunity to participate in the best projects or work assignments as others of similar education and experience YES YES NO NO If no explain why If no explain why 7 One goal of DOJ is to maintain a work climate in which people of both genders and all race ethnic groups can be included and achieve and contribute to their full potential 7 One goal of DOJ is to maintain a work climate in which people of both genders and all race ethnic groups can be included and achieve and contribute to their full potential Do you see anything in the daily work climate such as norms of behavior patterns of communication or work practices that is especially helpful to this goal Do you see anything in the daily work climate such as norms of behavior patterns of communication or work practices that is especially helpful to this goal Do you see anything that poses a barrier to this goal Do you see anything that poses a barrier to this goal 8 Have there been any previous efforts in your division to improve the climate for diversity such as training programs If so comment on the content and success of these efforts 8 Have there been any previous efforts in your division to improve the climate for diversity such as training programs If so comment on the content and success of these efforts YES YES NO NO Follow up Do you have any suggestions for improving the ability of your organization to create diversity or to take full advantage of the diversity of the workforce Follow up Do you have any suggestions for improving the ability of your organization to create diversity or to take full advantage of the diversity of the workforce Is there anything else you would like to tell us about the topic of workforce diversity Is there anything else you would like to tell us about the topic of workforce diversity ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE A-3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Survey questions Survey questions Following is the survey Following is the survey KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE A-3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE B-1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Appendix B Additional Graphs This appendix provides graphs with additional detail referenced throughout the text This appendix provides graphs with additional detail referenced throughout the text Figure B 1 Percent of attorneys minority by component Figure B 1 Percent of attorneys minority by component 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% Percent of attorneys Percent of attorneys Appendix B Additional Graphs 60% 50% 40% 60% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% % minority Antitrust Division Civil Division Civil Rights Division Criminal Division 9% 11% 32% 11% Environment Executive Office for and Natural Resources Immigration 9% 22% Federal Prisons 32% 0% Immigration United States United States and Tax Division Attorneys Trustee Naturalizatio 19% 9% 16% 13% % minority Antitrust Division Civil Division Civil Rights Division Criminal Division 9% 11% 32% 11% Environment Executive Office for and Natural Resources Immigration 9% Component 32% Immigration United States United States and Tax Division Attorneys Trustee Naturalizatio 19% 9% 16% 13% Figure B 2 Percent of attorneys minority by component 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% Percent of attorneys Percent of attorneys Federal Prisons Component Figure B 2 Percent of attorneys minority by component 60% 50% 40% 60% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% % female 22% Antitrust Division Civil Division Civil Rights Division Criminal Division Environment and Natural Resources 37% 40% 53% 37% 37% Executive Office for Immigration Federal Prisons 44% 48% Component Immigration United States United States and Tax Division Attorneys Trustee Naturalization 48% 33% 35% 41% 0% % female Antitrust Division Civil Division Civil Rights Division Criminal Division Environment and Natural Resources 37% 40% 53% 37% 37% Executive Office for Immigration Federal Prisons 44% 48% Component Immigration United States United States and Tax Division Attorneys Trustee Naturalization 48% 33% 35% 41% PAGE B-1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 3 Percent of attorneys minority by grade Litigating Divisions PAGE B-2 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 3 Percent of attorneys minority by grade Litigating Divisions 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0% Environment and Environment and Ant it rust Civil Civil Right s Cr iminal Ant it rust Civil Civil Right s Cr iminal GS- 11 12 23% 18% 63% 33% 33% 17% GS- 11 12 23% 18% 63% 33% 33% GS- 13 10% 16% 33% 27% 18% 17% GS- 13 10% 16% 33% 27% 18% 17% GS- 14 15% 11% 38% 21% 11% 10% GS- 14 15% 11% 38% 21% 11% 10% GS- 15 7% 10% 27% 9% 6% 8% GS- 15 7% 10% 27% 9% 6% 8% SL 0% 0% 40% 14% SL 0% 0% 40% 14% ES 5% 6% 17% 0% 8% 0% ES 5% 6% 17% 0% 8% 0% Tax Nat ur al Resour ces C om po ne nt 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% Percent minority Percent minority Figure B 4 Percent of attorneys minority by grade other components 100% 60% 50% 40% 60% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% GS-11 12 17% C om po ne nt Figure B 4 Percent of attorneys minority by grade other components 0% Tax Nat ur al Resour ces 10% 0% Executive Office of Immigration Review Federal Prisons Immigration and Naturalization Service United States Trustee 27% 43% 21% 0% GS-11 12 Executive Office of Immigration Review Federal Prisons Immigration and Naturalization Service 27% 43% 21% United States Trustee 0% GS-13 8% 54% 18% 25% GS-13 8% 54% 18% 25% GS-14 20% 25% 20% 15% GS-14 20% 25% 20% 15% GS-15 21% 19% 15% 12% GS-15 21% 19% 15% 12% ES 0% 0% 0% 50% ES 0% 0% 0% 50% Component Component PAGE B-2 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 5 Percent of attorneys female by grade Litigating Divisions PAGE B-3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 5 Percent of attorneys female by grade Litigating Divisions 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% Percent female 100% Percent female KPMG CONSULTING 60% 50% 40% 60% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0% Antitrust Civil Civil Rights Criminal Environment and Natural Resources Tax Antitrust Civil Civil Rights Criminal Environment and Natural Resources Tax GS-11 12 69% 55% 81% 78% 80% 75% GS-11 12 69% 55% 81% 78% 80% 75% GS-13 45% 35% 62% 27% 41% 40% GS-13 45% 35% 62% 27% 41% 40% GS-14 45% 53% 61% 31% 37% 29% GS-14 45% 53% 61% 31% 37% 29% GS-15 36% 38% 51% 37% 34% 32% GS-15 36% 38% 51% 37% 34% 32% SL 0% 50% 20% 0% SL 0% 50% 20% 0% ES 26% 25% 42% 33% ES 26% 25% 42% 33% 46% 33% 46% 33% Component Component Figure B 6 Percent of attorneys female by grade other components Figure B 6 Percent of attorneys female by grade other components 100% 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 0% 10% Execut ive Of f ice of Immigr at ion Review Feder al Pr isons Immigr at ion and Nat ur alizat ion Service 0% Unit ed St at es Trust ee GS- 11 12 60% 100% 58% 50% GS- 13 83% 64% 41% GS- 14 20% 33% GS- 15 59% 50% ES 33% 0% C om po ne nt Execut ive Of f ice of Immigr at ion Review Feder al Pr isons Immigr at ion and Nat ur alizat ion Service Unit ed St at es Trust ee GS- 11 12 60% 100% 58% 50% 25% GS- 13 83% 64% 41% 25% 52% 59% GS- 14 20% 33% 52% 59% 41% 38% GS- 15 59% 50% 41% 38% 25% 50% ES 33% 0% 25% 50% C om po ne nt PAGE B-3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 7 Percent of attorneys minority by job title within GS-15 and SES Litigating Divisions PAGE B-4 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 80% 70% 70% Percent minority 90% 80% Percent minority 100% 90% 50% 40% 60% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% Antitrust Civil Civil Rights Criminal Environment and Natural Resources GS-15 non-supervisor 7% 11% 28% 9% 7% GS-15 other 8% 0% 20% 0% 0% GS-15 dep chief supervisor 0% 0% 25% 8% 0% SES other 14% 10% 29% 0% SES chief or above 0% 7% 20% 0% 0% Antitrust Civil Civil Rights Criminal Environment and Natural Resources Tax GS-15 non-supervisor 7% 11% 28% 9% 7% 8% GS-15 other 8% 0% 20% 0% 0% 0% GS-15 dep chief supervisor 0% 0% 25% 8% 0% 0% 11% 0% SES other 14% 10% 29% 0% 11% 0% 0% 0% SES chief or above 0% 7% 20% 0% 0% 0% Tax 8% Component Component Figure B 8 Percent of attorneys female by job title within GS-15 and SES Litigating Divisions Figure B 8 Percent of attorneys female by job title within GS-15 and SES Litigating Divisions 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% Percent female 100% Percent female JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 7 Percent of attorneys minority by job title within GS-15 and SES Litigating Divisions 100% 60% KPMG CONSULTING 50% 40% 50% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0% Antitrust Civil Civil Rights Criminal Environment and Natural Resources GS-15 non-supervisor 37% 39% 50% 39% 33% GS-15 other 33% 0% 53% 0% 45% GS-15 dep chief supervisor 33% 30% 50% 33% 43% SES other 29% 33% 29% 36% 44% SES chief or above 29% 7% 40% 25% 71% 33% Component Antitrust Civil Civil Rights Criminal Environment and Natural Resources Tax GS-15 non-supervisor 37% 39% 50% 39% 33% 34% GS-15 other 33% 0% 53% 0% 45% 0% GS-15 dep chief supervisor 33% 30% 50% 33% 43% 0% 25% SES other 29% 33% 29% 36% 44% 25% SES chief or above 29% 7% 40% 25% 71% 33% Tax 34% Component PAGE B-4 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 9 Percent of base all hires and lateral hires minority by component 2001 PAGE B-5 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 9 Percent of base all hires and lateral hires minority by component 2001 50% 50% 45% 45% 40% 40% 35% 35% 30% 30% 25% 25% 20% 20% 15% 15% 10% 10% 5% 5% 0% KPMG CONSULTING 0% Anti-Tr ust Di vision Civil Di vi sion Ci vi l Rights Di vision Cr imi nal Di vision Envi r onment and Natur al Resour ces Executi ve Of f i ce of Immigr ation Feder al Pr isons Immi gr ati on and Natur ali zation Ser vi ce Tax Di vision Uni ted States Attor neys Uni ted States Tr ustee Anti-Tr ust Di vision Civil Di vi sion Ci vi l Rights Di vision Cr imi nal Di vision Envi r onment and Natur al Resour ces Executi ve Of f i ce of Immigr ation Feder al Pr isons Immi gr ati on and Natur ali zation Ser vi ce Tax Di vision Uni ted States Attor neys Base 9% 11% 27% 9% 9% 22% 31% 18% 9% 15% 14% Base 9% 11% 27% 9% 9% 22% 31% 18% 9% 15% 14% Al l hi r es 13% 19% 44% 22% 11% 33% 32% 23% 0% 22% 14% Al l hi r es 13% 19% 44% 22% 11% 33% 32% 23% 0% 22% 14% Later al hir es 9% 16% 32% 18% 6% 33% 30% 15% 0% 22% 15% Later al hir es 9% 16% 32% 18% 6% 33% 30% 15% 0% 22% 15% C o mp one n t C o mp one n t Figure B 10 Percent of base all hires and lateral hires minority 2001 Figure B 10 Percent of base all hires and lateral hires minority 2001 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% Uni ted States Tr ustee 0% Civil Di vi sion Ci vi l Rights Di vision Cr imi nal Di vision Envi r onment and Natur al Resour ces Executi ve Of f i ce of Immigr ation Feder al Pr isons Immi gr ati on and Natur ali zation Ser vi ce Tax Di vision Uni ted States Attor neys Uni ted States Tr ustee Base 35% 40% 50% 36% 35% 43% 46% 47% 31% 34% 42% Base 35% 40% 50% 36% 35% 43% 46% 47% 31% 34% 42% Al l hi r es 38% 41% 56% 31% 50% 56% 53% 43% 43% 35% 21% Al l hi r es 38% 41% 56% 31% 50% 56% 53% 43% 43% 35% 21% Later al hir es 27% 36% 50% 14% 44% 17% 40% 45% 43% 35% 23% Later al hir es 27% 36% 50% 14% 44% 17% 40% 45% 43% 35% 23% Anti-Tr ust Di vision Civil Di vi sion Ci vi l Rights Di vision Cr imi nal Di vision Envi r onment and Natur al Resour ces Executi ve Of f i ce of Immigr ation Feder al Pr isons Immi gr ati on and Natur ali zation Ser vi ce Tax Di vision Uni ted States Attor neys Uni ted States Tr ustee C o mp one n t Anti-Tr ust Di vision C o mp one n t PAGE B-5 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 11 Attrition rates for all attorneys women and minorities by component 2001 PAGE B-6 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% Anti tr ust Di vi sion Ci vil Divi si on Ci vi l Rights Di vision Cr imi nal Di vision Envi r onment and Natur al Resour ces Executi ve Of f i ce of Immigr ation Immigr ation and Feder al Pr i sons Natur al izati on Ser vice Al l 12% 10% 21% 12% 14% 13% 15% Mi nor i ti es 17% 17% 34% 29% 18% 20% Women 13% 10% 23% 11% 20% 17% 0% Tax Divi si on United States Attor neys Uni ted States Tr ustee Anti tr ust Di vi sion Ci vil Divi si on Ci vi l Rights Di vision Cr imi nal Di vision Envi r onment and Natur al Resour ces Executi ve Of f i ce of Immigr ation Tax Divi si on United States Attor neys 6% 4% 7% 6% Al l 12% 10% 21% 12% 14% 13% 15% 6% 4% 7% 6% 15% 8% 0% 10% 6% Mi nor i ti es 17% 17% 34% 29% 18% 20% 15% 8% 0% 10% 6% 17% 6% 5% 7% 3% Women 13% 10% 23% 11% 20% 17% 17% 6% 5% 7% 3% C om pone nt 100% 90% 90% 80% 80% 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% Women Uni ted States Tr ustee Figure B 12 Attrition rates for all GS-15 attorneys women and minorities by component 2001 100% Mi nor i ti es Immigr ation and Feder al Pr i sons Natur al izati on Ser vice C om pone nt Figure B 12 Attrition rates for all GS-15 attorneys women and minorities by component 2001 Al l JUNE 14 2002 Figure B 11 Attrition rates for all attorneys women and minorities by component 2001 100% 0% KPMG CONSULTING Envi r onment and Executi ve Of f ice Cr imi nal Di vi sion Natur al of Immigr ati on Feder al Pr i sons Resour ces Revi ew Tax Di vision United States Tr ustee 0% 10% 7% 3% Al l 0% 0% 0% 15% 4% Mi nor i ti es 0% 0% 4% 7% 4% Women Ci vi l Divisi on Civil Ri ghts Divi si on 6% 9% 5% 7% 7% 1% 13% 16% 7% 4% 18% 6% 12% 5% 5% 8% C om pone nt 0% Immigr ati on and Natur al izati on Ser vi ce Antitr ust Divisi on Antitr ust Divisi on Ci vi l Divisi on Civil Ri ghts Divi si on Cr imi nal Di vi sion Immigr ati on and Natur al izati on Ser vi ce Tax Di vision 6% 9% 5% 7% Envi r onment and Executi ve Of f ice Natur al of Immigr ati on Feder al Pr i sons Resour ces Revi ew 7% 1% 0% 10% 7% 3% 13% 16% 7% 4% 18% 0% 0% 0% 15% 4% 6% 12% 5% 5% 8% 0% 0% 4% 7% 4% C om pone nt United States Tr ustee PAGE B-6 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-1 Appendix C Bibliography Appendix C Bibliography Bibliography of benchmarking and best practices sources Bibliography of benchmarking and best practices sources American Lawyer Media 2000 “2000 Diversity Scorecard ” Minority Law Journal Online http www MinorityLawJournal com summer01 texts chart html American Lawyer Media 2000 “2000 Diversity Scorecard ” Minority Law Journal Online http www MinorityLawJournal com summer01 texts chart html Dalphonse Sherri October 2001 “Great Places to Work ” Washingtonian 95 Dalphonse Sherri October 2001 “Great Places to Work ” Washingtonian 95 Dick Donna 2001 “International Paper’s Diversity Trail ” Reproduced from Black Enterprise On-line http www mcca com site data corporate BP ip1201 htm Dick Donna 2001 “International Paper’s Diversity Trail ” Reproduced from Black Enterprise On-line http www mcca com site data corporate BP ip1201 htm Gavin M 2000 Bar None Report to the President of the United States on the Status of People of Color and Pro Bono Services in the Legal Profession San Francisco CA Lawyers for One America Gavin M 2000 Bar None Report to the President of the United States on the Status of People of Color and Pro Bono Services in the Legal Profession San Francisco CA Lawyers for One America Passante Lisa M et al 1999 Creating the DuPont Women Lawyer’s Network Women’s group is catalyst for understanding and empowerment On-line http www mcca com site data corporate BP dupont899 htm Passante Lisa M et al 1999 Creating the DuPont Women Lawyer’s Network Women’s group is catalyst for understanding and empowerment On-line http www mcca com site data corporate BP dupont899 htm General Accounting Office 1997 Hispanic Employment Best Practices Used by Selected Agencies and Companies GAO GGD-97-46R General Accounting Office 1997 Hispanic Employment Best Practices Used by Selected Agencies and Companies GAO GGD-97-46R Press Release June 22 2001 “Akin Gump Receives Thomas L Sager Award Minority Corporate Counsel Association Recognizes Firm for Promoting Diversity ” On-line http www akingump com news news_2001_6_22_993738571 html Press Release June 22 2001 “Akin Gump Receives Thomas L Sager Award Minority Corporate Counsel Association Recognizes Firm for Promoting Diversity ” On-line http www akingump com news news_2001_6_22_993738571 html SEC Press Release January 16 1998 Speech by Chairman Arthur Levitt Jr “Inclusion and Diversity on Wall Street ” On-line http www sec gov SEC Press Release January 16 1998 Speech by Chairman Arthur Levitt Jr “Inclusion and Diversity on Wall Street ” On-line http www sec gov Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1997 Best Equal Employment Opportunity Policies Programs and Practices in the Private Sector EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission 1997 Best Equal Employment Opportunity Policies Programs and Practices in the Private Sector EEOC Thelen Jennifer 2002 MoFo’s Rainbow One of the Most Diverse Firms in the Country Didn’t’ Get That Way Overnight On-line http http www mofo com about ArticleDetail cfm concentrationID ID 689 Type 4 Thelen Jennifer 2002 MoFo’s Rainbow One of the Most Diverse Firms in the Country Didn’t’ Get That Way Overnight On-line http http www mofo com about ArticleDetail cfm concentrationID ID 689 Type 4 PTO Press Release August 2 2001 “Deputy Commerce Secretary Celebrates USPTO’s Many Facets of Diversity ” On-line http www uspto gov PTO Press Release August 2 2001 “Deputy Commerce Secretary Celebrates USPTO’s Many Facets of Diversity ” On-line http www uspto gov 2001 “An overview of Bell Atlantic’s Corporate Department’s Diversity Plan At Bell Atlantic Diversity Is Measured and Rewarded ” On-line http www mcca com site data corporate BP BellAtlantic htm 2001 “An overview of Bell Atlantic’s Corporate Department’s Diversity Plan At Bell Atlantic Diversity Is Measured and Rewarded ” On-line http www mcca com site data corporate BP BellAtlantic htm Legal Times 2001 “Legal Times 100 Minority and Women Lawyers At the D C Metro Area’s 25 Largest Law Offices ” On-line www hhlaw com Legal Times 2001 “Legal Times 100 Minority and Women Lawyers At the D C Metro Area’s 25 Largest Law Offices ” On-line www hhlaw com ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-2 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-2 2001 “Remarks by Senior Vice President and General Counsel Stacey J Mobley to the National Bar Association ” On-line http www dupont com corp news speeches mobley_03_01_01 html 2001 “Remarks by Senior Vice President and General Counsel Stacey J Mobley to the National Bar Association ” On-line http www dupont com corp news speeches mobley_03_01_01 html 2001 “The Sager Awards ” On-line http www mcca com site data lawfirms sager index html 2001 “The Sager Awards ” On-line http www mcca com site data lawfirms sager index html 2001 “The Employers of Choice Awards ” On-line http www mcca com site data corporate EmployersofChoice index html 2001 “The Employers of Choice Awards ” On-line http www mcca com site data corporate EmployersofChoice index html 2002 “Akin Gump Narrative Response — 2001 Thomas L Sager Award ” Reproduced with the permission of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field LLP 2002 “Akin Gump Narrative Response — 2001 Thomas L Sager Award ” Reproduced with the permission of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer Field LLP 2002 “Arnold Porter NALP Law Firm Questionnaire 2000-2001 Academic Year ” Online http www arnoldporter com NALP NALP-DC pdf 2002 “Arnold Porter NALP Law Firm Questionnaire 2000-2001 Academic Year ” Online http www arnoldporter com NALP NALP-DC pdf 2002 “Arnold Porter’s Washington DC Office Overview ” On-line http www arnoldporter com tableset cfm text associates_dc gif recruiting toolbar recruiting 2002 “Arnold Porter’s Washington DC Office Overview ” On-line http www arnoldporter com tableset cfm text associates_dc gif recruiting toolbar recruiting 2002 “Arnold Porter Overview ” On-line http www arnoldporter com 2002 “Arnold Porter Overview ” On-line http www arnoldporter com 2002 “Complaint No 2 SEC v Andrew S Fastow ” On-line http www sec gov litigation complaints comp2lr17270 htm 2002 “Complaint No 2 SEC v Andrew S Fastow ” On-line http www sec gov litigation complaints comp2lr17270 htm 2002 Hogan Hartson Recruiting web page On-line http www hhlaw com recruiting 2002 Hogan Hartson Recruiting web page On-line http www hhlaw com recruiting 2002 “Microsoft Living Our Values ” On-line http www microsoft com mscorp values htm 2002 “Microsoft Living Our Values ” On-line http www microsoft com mscorp values htm 2002 “Vault 2001 Survey ” On-line Available at www vault com 2002 “Vault 2001 Survey ” On-line Available at www vault com ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-3 Bibliography of other sources Bibliography of other sources DOJ correspondence and other documents DOJ correspondence and other documents Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General Memorandum from The Attorney General to Heads of Department Components and All U S Attorneys Department of Justice “Recruitment of Lateral Attorneys ” Memorandum from The Attorney General to Heads of Department Components and All U S Attorneys Department of Justice “Recruitment of Lateral Attorneys ” Memorandum from The Attorney General to All Department Attorneys Department of Justice “Recruitment of Lateral Attorneys ” Memorandum from The Attorney General to All Department Attorneys Department of Justice “Recruitment of Lateral Attorneys ” Memorandum from The Attorney General to Heads of Department Components and All United States Attorneys Department of Justice “Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” 06 16 00 Memorandum from The Attorney General to Heads of Department Components and All United States Attorneys Department of Justice “Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” 06 16 00 Memorandum from Eric H Holder Jr Deputy Attorney General to Heads of Department Components and All United States Attorneys Department of Justice “Creation of the Deputy Attorney General’s Advisory Group on the Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 01 10 01 Memorandum from Eric H Holder Jr Deputy Attorney General to Heads of Department Components and All United States Attorneys Department of Justice “Creation of the Deputy Attorney General’s Advisory Group on the Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 01 10 01 Report from Larry D Thompson Deputy Attorney General to The Honorable Mitchell E Daniels Jr Director Office of Management and Budget U S Department of Justice Workforce Planning and Restructuring Baseline Data as of September 30 2000 06 28 01 Report from Larry D Thompson Deputy Attorney General to The Honorable Mitchell E Daniels Jr Director Office of Management and Budget U S Department of Justice Workforce Planning and Restructuring Baseline Data as of September 30 2000 06 28 01 Memorandum from Sheryl L Robinson Deputy Director Office of Intergovernmental Affairs to The Deputy Attorney General “Summary of Meeting with the Coalition of Bar Associations of Color ” 05 01 Memorandum from Sheryl L Robinson Deputy Director Office of Intergovernmental Affairs to The Deputy Attorney General “Summary of Meeting with the Coalition of Bar Associations of Color ” 05 01 Memorandum from David H Laufman Chief of Staff Office of the Deputy Attorney General to Bob Diegleman Justice Management Division on meetings with minority bar associations 10 29 01 Memorandum from David H Laufman Chief of Staff Office of the Deputy Attorney General to Bob Diegleman Justice Management Division on meetings with minority bar associations 10 29 01 Report from the Office of the Attorney General U S Department of Justice Fiscal Years 20012006 Strategic Plan 11 01 Report from the Office of the Attorney General U S Department of Justice Fiscal Years 20012006 Strategic Plan 11 01 Memorandum from Loretta King Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division to David Laufman Chief of Staff Office of the Deputy Attorney General “Summary of Activities of Eight-Point Plan Advisory Group ” 12 05 01 Memorandum from Loretta King Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division to David Laufman Chief of Staff Office of the Deputy Attorney General “Summary of Activities of Eight-Point Plan Advisory Group ” 12 05 01 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-4 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-4 Memorandum from Larry D Thompson Deputy Attorney General to Associate Attorney General Commissioner Immigration and Naturalization Service Director Federal Bureau of Prisons Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division Assistant Attorney General Civil Division Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division Assistant Attorney General Tax Division Director Executive Office for United States Attorneys Director Executive Office for Immigration Review Director Executive Office for United States Trustees Acting Assistant Attorney General Justice Management Division Director Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management and Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff “Review of Diversity of the Department’s Attorney Workforce ” 01 16 02 Memorandum from Larry D Thompson Deputy Attorney General to Associate Attorney General Commissioner Immigration and Naturalization Service Director Federal Bureau of Prisons Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division Assistant Attorney General Civil Division Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division Assistant Attorney General Tax Division Director Executive Office for United States Attorneys Director Executive Office for Immigration Review Director Executive Office for United States Trustees Acting Assistant Attorney General Justice Management Division Director Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management and Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff “Review of Diversity of the Department’s Attorney Workforce ” 01 16 02 Antitrust Division Antitrust Division Memorandum from Willie L Hudgins Jr attorney to James F Rill Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division regarding diversity issues in the Division and a meeting between the AAG and Division black attorneys 01 28 92 Memorandum from Willie L Hudgins Jr attorney to James F Rill Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division regarding diversity issues in the Division and a meeting between the AAG and Division black attorneys 01 28 92 Policy statement from Joel Klein Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division regarding Division’s mentoring program ATR 1420 1 05 03 99 Policy statement from Joel Klein Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division regarding Division’s mentoring program ATR 1420 1 05 03 99 Policy statement from John M Nannes Acting Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division regarding promotion criteria ATR 1335 2 04 16 00 Policy statement from John M Nannes Acting Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division regarding promotion criteria ATR 1335 2 04 16 00 Antitrust Division “Outreach Program Action Plan ” 2001 Antitrust Division “Outreach Program Action Plan ” 2001 Policy statement from Thomas King Executive Officer Antitrust Division regarding evaluating candidates for supervisory positions 01 18 01 Policy statement from Thomas King Executive Officer Antitrust Division regarding evaluating candidates for supervisory positions 01 18 01 Memorandum from Thomas King Executive Officer Antitrust Division to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division ” Eight-Point Diversity Plan implementation efforts ” 03 15 01 Memorandum from Thomas King Executive Officer Antitrust Division to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division ” Eight-Point Diversity Plan implementation efforts ” 03 15 01 Policy statement from Thomas King Executive Officer Antitrust Division regarding performance appraisal ATR 1430 1 06 19 01 Policy statement from Thomas King Executive Officer Antitrust Division regarding performance appraisal ATR 1430 1 06 19 01 Policy statement from Thomas King Executive Officer Antitrust Division regarding alternative work schedules program ATR 1650 08 10 01 Policy statement from Thomas King Executive Officer Antitrust Division regarding alternative work schedules program ATR 1650 08 10 01 Additional HR systems documentation Antitrust Division Additional HR systems documentation Antitrust Division Civil Division Civil Division Memorandum from Kenneth L Zwick Director Office of Management Programs Civil Division to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “Report on the Status of the Civil Division’s Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 04 30 01 Memorandum from Kenneth L Zwick Director Office of Management Programs Civil Division to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “Report on the Status of the Civil Division’s Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 04 30 01 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-5 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-5 Memorandum from Kenneth L Zwick Director Office of Management Programs Civil Division to Branch Office Staff Directors Civil Division “Performance Ratings and Performance Awards for Employees in the Two-Level Appraisal Program ” 06 25 01 Memorandum from Kenneth L Zwick Director Office of Management Programs Civil Division to Branch Office Staff Directors Civil Division “Performance Ratings and Performance Awards for Employees in the Two-Level Appraisal Program ” 06 25 01 Civil Rights Division Civil Rights Division Report from Stephanie E Block Deputy Executive Officer Civil Rights Division “8 point plan to Enhance Diversity — Status Report ” 01 19 01 Report from Stephanie E Block Deputy Executive Officer Civil Rights Division “8 point plan to Enhance Diversity — Status Report ” 01 19 01 Report from Scendis U S Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Work Environment Assessment 2001 08 01 Report from Scendis U S Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Work Environment Assessment 2001 08 01 Criminal Division Criminal Division Memorandum from John C Keeney Acting Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division to Attorney General’s Advisory Committee “Criminal Division’s Progress Report on the Implementation of the Eight Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 01 25 01 Memorandum from John C Keeney Acting Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division to Attorney General’s Advisory Committee “Criminal Division’s Progress Report on the Implementation of the Eight Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 01 25 01 Environment and Natural Resources Division Environment and Natural Resources Division Report from the Environment and Natural Resources Division “Environment and Natural Resources Division Implementation of the Attorney General’s Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” Report from the Environment and Natural Resources Division “Environment and Natural Resources Division Implementation of the Attorney General’s Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” Additional HR systems documentation Environment and Natural Resources Division Additional HR systems documentation Environment and Natural Resources Division Tax Division Tax Division Memorandum from Richard R Ward Counsel to the Acting Assistant Attorney General Tax Division to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “Tax Division Compliance with Eight-Point Plan for Diversity ” 01 18 01 Memorandum from Richard R Ward Counsel to the Acting Assistant Attorney General Tax Division to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “Tax Division Compliance with Eight-Point Plan for Diversity ” 01 18 01 Bureau of Prisons Bureau of Prisons Memorandum from Christopher Erlewine Assistant Director and General Counsel Federal Bureau of Prisons to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “Creation of the Deputy Attorney General’s Advisory Group on the Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 01 17 01 Memorandum from Christopher Erlewine Assistant Director and General Counsel Federal Bureau of Prisons to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “Creation of the Deputy Attorney General’s Advisory Group on the Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 01 17 01 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-6 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-6 Executive Office for Immigration Review Executive Office for Immigration Review Memorandum from Larry D’Elia Assistant Director for Administration Executive Office for Immigration Review to Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff Justice Management Division “Creation of the Deputy Attorney General’s Advisory Group on Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 04 06 01 Memorandum from Larry D’Elia Assistant Director for Administration Executive Office for Immigration Review to Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff Justice Management Division “Creation of the Deputy Attorney General’s Advisory Group on Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 04 06 01 Additional HR systems documentation Executive Office for Immigration Review Additional HR systems documentation Executive Office for Immigration Review Executive Office for U S Attorneys U S Attorneys’ Offices Executive Office for U S Attorneys U S Attorneys’ Offices Policy statement from Executive Office for U S Attorneys regarding Performance Evaluation Handbook USAP 3-4 430 001 M Policy statement from Executive Office for U S Attorneys regarding Performance Evaluation Handbook USAP 3-4 430 001 M Memorandum from Mary H Marguia Director Executive Office for U S Attorneys to All United States Attorneys All First Assistant United States Attorneys All Criminal Chiefs and All Administrative Officers “Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” 07 13 00 Memorandum from Mary H Marguia Director Executive Office for U S Attorneys to All United States Attorneys All First Assistant United States Attorneys All Criminal Chiefs and All Administrative Officers “Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” 07 13 00 Memorandum from James L Santalle Principal Deputy Director Executive Office for U S Attorneys to Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff Justice Management Division “Executive Office for United States Attorneys’ Preliminary Draft Memorandum on Eight Point Plan ” 03 20 01 Memorandum from James L Santalle Principal Deputy Director Executive Office for U S Attorneys to Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff Justice Management Division “Executive Office for United States Attorneys’ Preliminary Draft Memorandum on Eight Point Plan ” 03 20 01 Report from Sharon J Zealey U S Attorney Southern District of Ohio to Members of the Eight Point Plan Committee Affirmative Employment Program Plan for Minorities Women and Persons with Disabilities 04 14 01 Report from Sharon J Zealey U S Attorney Southern District of Ohio to Members of the Eight Point Plan Committee Affirmative Employment Program Plan for Minorities Women and Persons with Disabilities 04 14 01 Report from Juan Milanes Assistant Director Executive Office for U S Attorneys to Loretta King Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division and David H Laufman Chief of Staff Office of the Deputy Attorney General “8-point plan ” 12 05 01 Report from Juan Milanes Assistant Director Executive Office for U S Attorneys to Loretta King Deputy Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division and David H Laufman Chief of Staff Office of the Deputy Attorney General “8-point plan ” 12 05 01 Additional HR systems documentation Executive Office for U S Attorneys Additional HR systems documentation Executive Office for U S Attorneys Executive Office for U S Trustees Executive Office for U S Trustees Memorandum from John S Raymos Deputy Assistant Director for Resources Executive Office for U S Trustees to Ted McBurrows Director EEO Staff Justice Management Division “Eight Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” 04 05 01 Memorandum from John S Raymos Deputy Assistant Director for Resources Executive Office for U S Trustees to Ted McBurrows Director EEO Staff Justice Management Division “Eight Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” 04 05 01 Immigration and Naturalization Service Immigration and Naturalization Service Policy statement from T Alexander Aleinikoff General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service “Applications from Experienced Attorneys ” Policy statement from T Alexander Aleinikoff General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service “Applications from Experienced Attorneys ” ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-7 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-7 Policy statement from David A Martin General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service “Criteria for the Hiring of Attorneys ” Policy statement from David A Martin General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service “Criteria for the Hiring of Attorneys ” Memorandum from Robert S Finkelstein Chief Management Division and Associate General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service to Bo Cooper General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service “Annual Report on the Diversity of the Attorney Workforce of the Legal Proceedings Program ” 10 02 00 Memorandum from Robert S Finkelstein Chief Management Division and Associate General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service to Bo Cooper General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service “Annual Report on the Diversity of the Attorney Workforce of the Legal Proceedings Program ” 10 02 00 Additional HR systems documentation Immigration and Naturalization Service Additional HR systems documentation Immigration and Naturalization Service Memorandum from Bo Cooper General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service to Eric H Holder Jr Deputy Attorney General “Creation of the Deputy Attorney General’s Advisory Group on the Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice” HQCOU 60 3-C 01 19 01 Memorandum from Bo Cooper General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service to Eric H Holder Jr Deputy Attorney General “Creation of the Deputy Attorney General’s Advisory Group on the Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice” HQCOU 60 3-C 01 19 01 Memorandum from Bo Cooper General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service to All Regional Counsel and All District Counsel “New Performance Appraisal Program” HQCOU 100 11 1-P Memorandum from Bo Cooper General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service to All Regional Counsel and All District Counsel “New Performance Appraisal Program” HQCOU 100 11 1-P Memorandum from Robert S Finkelstein Chief Attorney Management Division and Associate General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service to Bo Cooper General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service “Eighth Annual Report on the Diversity of the Attorney Workforce of the Legal Proceedings Program” HQCOU 60 3-C 10 01 01 Memorandum from Robert S Finkelstein Chief Attorney Management Division and Associate General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service to Bo Cooper General Counsel Immigration and Naturalization Service “Eighth Annual Report on the Diversity of the Attorney Workforce of the Legal Proceedings Program” HQCOU 60 3-C 10 01 01 Memorandum draft “Accelerated Promotion Policy for Attorneys Hired at the GS-11 or GS-12 levels” HQCOU 100 15-P 01 02 Memorandum draft “Accelerated Promotion Policy for Attorneys Hired at the GS-11 or GS-12 levels” HQCOU 100 15-P 01 02 Memorandum from William B Odencrantz to Robert S Finkelstein et al “Hiring Committee ” 01 25 02 Memorandum from William B Odencrantz to Robert S Finkelstein et al “Hiring Committee ” 01 25 02 Justice Management Division Justice Management Division Memorandum from Harry H Flickinger Acting Assistant Attorney General Administration to all employees “Performance Management System for General Schedule and Prevailing Rate Employees ” 04 14 87 Memorandum from Harry H Flickinger Acting Assistant Attorney General Administration to all employees “Performance Management System for General Schedule and Prevailing Rate Employees ” 04 14 87 Report from the Management and Planning Staff Justice Management Division A Management Review of Attorney Recruitment and Retention in the Department’s Legal Divisions 10 89 Report from the Management and Planning Staff Justice Management Division A Management Review of Attorney Recruitment and Retention in the Department’s Legal Divisions 10 89 Memorandum from Stephen R Colgate Assistant Attorney General for Administration to Heads of all Department Components “Human Resources Order Equal Employment Opportunity Program ” 06 23 00 Memorandum from Stephen R Colgate Assistant Attorney General for Administration to Heads of all Department Components “Human Resources Order Equal Employment Opportunity Program ” 06 23 00 Report from the Personnel Staff Justice Management Division Transition 2001 Human Resources Briefing Guide 11 00 Report from the Personnel Staff Justice Management Division Transition 2001 Human Resources Briefing Guide 11 00 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-8 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-8 Report from the Management and Planning Staff Justice Management Division Transition Overview 12 00 Report from the Management and Planning Staff Justice Management Division Transition Overview 12 00 Memorandum from Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff Justice Management Division to Eight Point Advisory Group Members “Materials on 8 Point Plan ” 05 01 Memorandum from Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff Justice Management Division to Eight Point Advisory Group Members “Materials on 8 Point Plan ” 05 01 Report from Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff and Janis A Sposato Acting Assistant Attorney General for Administration Justice Management Division “Affirmative Employment Program for Minorities and Women Annual Accomplishment Report Fiscal Year 2000 ” 06 01 Report from Ted McBurrows Director Equal Employment Opportunity Staff and Janis A Sposato Acting Assistant Attorney General for Administration Justice Management Division “Affirmative Employment Program for Minorities and Women Annual Accomplishment Report Fiscal Year 2000 ” 06 01 Report from Janis A Sposato Acting Assistant Attorney General for Administration to the Deputy Attorney General “Workforce Planning and Restructuring OMB Bulletin No 01-07 ” 06 01 Report from Janis A Sposato Acting Assistant Attorney General for Administration to the Deputy Attorney General “Workforce Planning and Restructuring OMB Bulletin No 01-07 ” 06 01 Report from the Management and Planning Staff Justice Management Division U S Department of Justice Organization Mission and Functions Manual 07 01 Report from the Management and Planning Staff Justice Management Division U S Department of Justice Organization Mission and Functions Manual 07 01 Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management Memorandum from Linda Cinciotta Director Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management to Heads of Offices Boards Bureaus and Divisions Department of Justice “Delegation of Authority to Approve Attorney Law Clerk and Law Student Promotions ” 11 30 95 Memorandum from Linda Cinciotta Director Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management to Heads of Offices Boards Bureaus and Divisions Department of Justice “Delegation of Authority to Approve Attorney Law Clerk and Law Student Promotions ” 11 30 95 Memorandum from Linda A Cinciotta Director Office of Attorney Personnel Management to The Attorney General “Report on the Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program ” 02 01 00 Memorandum from Linda A Cinciotta Director Office of Attorney Personnel Management to The Attorney General “Report on the Lateral Attorney Recruitment Program ” 02 01 00 Report from Office of Attorney Personnel Management Results from OAPM’s Survey of 2000 Summer Law Interns 01 01 Report from Office of Attorney Personnel Management Results from OAPM’s Survey of 2000 Summer Law Interns 01 01 Memorandum from Linda Cinciotta Director Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management to Eight Point Plan Advisory Group “Impact of LARP’s Sunset upon Implementation of the Eight Point Plan ” 04 19 01 Memorandum from Linda Cinciotta Director Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management to Eight Point Plan Advisory Group “Impact of LARP’s Sunset upon Implementation of the Eight Point Plan ” 04 19 01 Memorandum from Rena Cervoni Assistant Director Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management to Robert F Diegleman Director Management and Planning Staff Justice Management Division “Diversity of the Department’s Workforce ” 11 27 01 Memorandum from Rena Cervoni Assistant Director Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management to Robert F Diegleman Director Management and Planning Staff Justice Management Division “Diversity of the Department’s Workforce ” 11 27 01 Report from Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management 2001 Summer Law Intern Survey Results 02 04 02 Report from Office of Attorney Recruitment and Management 2001 Summer Law Intern Survey Results 02 04 02 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-9 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-9 Department-wide other Department-wide other Memorandum from Frits Geurtsen Chief of Staff Office of Legal Counsel to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “Quarterly Report on Diversity Enhancement ” 01 17 01 Memorandum from Frits Geurtsen Chief of Staff Office of Legal Counsel to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “Quarterly Report on Diversity Enhancement ” 01 17 01 Memorandum from Robert C Gleason Deputy Chief Counsel Drug Enforcement Administration to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “DOJ’s Eight-Point Diversity Plan ” 01 17 01 Memorandum from Robert C Gleason Deputy Chief Counsel Drug Enforcement Administration to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “DOJ’s Eight-Point Diversity Plan ” 01 17 01 Memorandum from Lisa M Dickinson EEO Officer U S Marshals Service to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “United States Marshals Service Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 01 25 01 Memorandum from Lisa M Dickinson EEO Officer U S Marshals Service to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “United States Marshals Service Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 01 25 01 Memorandum from A Douglas Melamed Acting Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division David W Ogden Assistant Attorney General Civil Division Bill Lann Lee Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division James K Robinson Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division Lois J Schiffer Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division and Paula M Junghans Acting Assistant Attorney General Tax Division to Attorney General “Attorney Compensation ” 01 18 01 Memorandum from A Douglas Melamed Acting Assistant Attorney General Antitrust Division David W Ogden Assistant Attorney General Civil Division Bill Lann Lee Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division James K Robinson Assistant Attorney General Criminal Division Lois J Schiffer Assistant Attorney General Environment and Natural Resources Division and Paula M Junghans Acting Assistant Attorney General Tax Division to Attorney General “Attorney Compensation ” 01 18 01 Agenda and minutes Eight Point Plan Advisory Committee Meetings 06 01 Agenda and minutes Eight Point Plan Advisory Committee Meetings 06 01 Memorandum from Nancy E Navarro Management Analyst Office of Policy Development to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “First Quarter 2001 Report on the Status of OPD’s Implementation of the Eight Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 03 30 01 Memorandum from Nancy E Navarro Management Analyst Office of Policy Development to John C Vail Deputy Assistant Attorney General Human Resources Administration Justice Management Division “First Quarter 2001 Report on the Status of OPD’s Implementation of the Eight Point Plan to Enhance Diversity in the Department of Justice ” 03 30 01 Memorandum from Ms Kathleen Day Koch Chief Federal Bureau of Investigation to Mr Ted McBurrows Director Department of Justice “FBI Report on Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” 04 13 01 Memorandum from Ms Kathleen Day Koch Chief Federal Bureau of Investigation to Mr Ted McBurrows Director Department of Justice “FBI Report on Eight-Point Plan to Enhance Diversity ” 04 13 01 Memorandum from Kurt E January President and Barbara Lott Chief Shop Steward AFSCME Local 3719 to Larry D Thompson Deputy Attorney General and Robert F Diegelman Acting Assistant Attorney General Justice Management Division “Diversity of the Department of Justice’s Workforce ” 02 22 02 Memorandum from Kurt E January President and Barbara Lott Chief Shop Steward AFSCME Local 3719 to Larry D Thompson Deputy Attorney General and Robert F Diegelman Acting Assistant Attorney General Justice Management Division “Diversity of the Department of Justice’s Workforce ” 02 22 02 Books and other academic research materials Books and other academic research materials Carr-Ruffino Norma 1999 Diversity Success Strategies Boston MA ButterworthHeinemann Carr-Ruffino Norma 1999 Diversity Success Strategies Boston MA ButterworthHeinemann Cox Taylor Jr 2001 Creating the Multicultural Organization San Francisco CA JosseyBass Cox Taylor Jr 2001 Creating the Multicultural Organization San Francisco CA JosseyBass ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-10 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE C-10 Sonnenschein William 1997 The Diversity Toolkit Chicago IL Contemporary Books Sonnenschein William 1997 The Diversity Toolkit Chicago IL Contemporary Books Cox Taylor Jr 1993 Cultural Diversity in Organizations Theory Research Practice San Francisco CA Berrett-Koehler Publishers Cox Taylor Jr 1993 Cultural Diversity in Organizations Theory Research Practice San Francisco CA Berrett-Koehler Publishers Articles and other materials from industry Articles and other materials from industry American Bar Association Commission of Opportunities for Minorities in the Profession 1998 Miles to Go Progress of Minorities in the Legal Profession American Bar Association 2000 “The Legal Eagles Are Taking Wing ” Washington Post 05 09 00 p A29 American Bar Association Commission of Opportunities for Minorities in the Profession 1998 Miles to Go Progress of Minorities in the Legal Profession American Bar Association 2000 “The Legal Eagles Are Taking Wing ” Washington Post 05 09 00 p A29 2002 “Study to Look at How Agencies Sell Federal Careers ” Government Executive 03 04 02 available at http www govexec com dailyfed 0302 030402m1 htm 2002 “Study to Look at How Agencies Sell Federal Careers ” Government Executive 03 04 02 available at http www govexec com dailyfed 0302 030402m1 htm Other Federal government sources Other Federal government sources OPM Fedscope 12 01 http www opm gov OPM Fedscope 12 01 http www opm gov OPM Office of Workforce Information http www opm gov OPM Office of Workforce Information http www opm gov Executive Order 13171 “Hispanic Employment in the Federal Government ” 65 FR 61252 10 16 00 and related materials Executive Order 13171 “Hispanic Employment in the Federal Government ” 65 FR 61252 10 16 00 and related materials U S Office of Personnel Management 1998 “Voluntary Early Retirement Authorities through September 30 1999 under 5 CFR 831 114 and 842 213 Agency Guide to Implementing Early Retirement Programs ” OPM 07 98 U S Office of Personnel Management 1998 “Voluntary Early Retirement Authorities through September 30 1999 under 5 CFR 831 114 and 842 213 Agency Guide to Implementing Early Retirement Programs ” OPM 07 98 U S Office of Personnel Management 2001 Report to the President on Hispanic Employment in the Federal Government Office of Personnel Management 10 12 01 U S Office of Personnel Management 2001 Report to the President on Hispanic Employment in the Federal Government Office of Personnel Management 10 12 01 U S Office of Personnel Management 2000 Building and Maintaining a Diverse HighQuality Workforce A Guide for Federal Agencies Office of Personnel Management ES-DO05 06 00 U S Office of Personnel Management 2000 Building and Maintaining a Diverse HighQuality Workforce A Guide for Federal Agencies Office of Personnel Management ES-DO05 06 00 Merit Systems Protection Board 1995 Achieving a Representative Federal Workforce Addressing the Barriers to Hispanic Participation MSPB Merit Systems Protection Board 1995 Achieving a Representative Federal Workforce Addressing the Barriers to Hispanic Participation MSPB Merit Systems Protection Board 2002 “Understanding Minority-Nonminority Attitude Differences ” Issues of Merit MSPB 01 02 Merit Systems Protection Board 2002 “Understanding Minority-Nonminority Attitude Differences ” Issues of Merit MSPB 01 02 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-1 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-1 Appendix D Additional Statistical Analysis of Survey Results Appendix D Additional Statistical Analysis of Survey Results Survey question responses Survey question responses The following tables show responses to each survey question by race ethnic group and gender For each question the responses of each group as well as the total sample are provided Each table is labeled with the question number Please refer to appendix A for the survey form The following tables show responses to each survey question by race ethnic group and gender For each question the responses of each group as well as the total sample are provided Each table is labeled with the question number Please refer to appendix A for the survey form ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-2 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-2 Responses by race ethnicity Responses by race ethnicity The following tables provide survey responses by race ethnic group The top-left cell provides the question number corresponding to the survey form In multi-part questions the question number is followed by the part number The left-hand column lists each response to the question and the top row lists race ethnicity groups Due to rounding columns may not add to 100% The following tables provide survey responses by race ethnic group The top-left cell provides the question number corresponding to the survey form In multi-part questions the question number is followed by the part number The left-hand column lists each response to the question and the top row lists race ethnicity groups Due to rounding columns may not add to 100% Q1-1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 3% 28 7% 64 8% 73 13% 119 19% 182 35% 326 16% 149 100% 941 Black 6% 8 13% 18 10% 14 15% 21 25% 35 24% 34 7% 10 100% 140 Hisp 7% 5 12% 9 8% 6 13% 10 24% 18 27% 20 9% 7 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 7% 3 10% 4 17% 7 12% 5 32% 13 12% 5 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 43% 3 0% 0 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 29% 2 100% 7 Other 11% 2 16% 3 0% 0 16% 3 16% 3 42% 8 0% 0 100% 19 Total 4% 47 8% 100 8% 97 13% 161 20% 244 33% 401 14% 173 100% 1223 Q1-1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 3% 28 7% 64 8% 73 13% 119 19% 182 35% 326 16% 149 100% 941 Black 6% 8 13% 18 10% 14 15% 21 25% 35 24% 34 7% 10 100% 140 Hisp 7% 5 12% 9 8% 6 13% 10 24% 18 27% 20 9% 7 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 7% 3 10% 4 17% 7 12% 5 32% 13 12% 5 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 43% 3 0% 0 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 29% 2 100% 7 Other 11% 2 16% 3 0% 0 16% 3 16% 3 42% 8 0% 0 100% 19 Total 4% 47 8% 100 8% 97 13% 161 20% 244 33% 401 14% 173 100% 1223 Q1-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 7% 69 8% 78 13% 119 22% 209 23% 220 20% 184 7% 63 100% 942 Black 11% 15 21% 29 14% 19 20% 28 17% 24 14% 20 3% 4 100% 139 Hisp 7% 5 15% 11 23% 17 25% 19 20% 15 8% 6 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 17% 7 7% 3 32% 13 17% 7 15% 6 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 16% 3 5% 1 16% 3 26% 5 21% 4 16% 3 0% 0 100% 19 Total 8% 95 10% 128 13% 164 22% 275 22% 270 18% 220 6% 71 100% 1223 Q1-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 7% 69 8% 78 13% 119 22% 209 23% 220 20% 184 7% 63 100% 942 Black 11% 15 21% 29 14% 19 20% 28 17% 24 14% 20 3% 4 100% 139 Hisp 7% 5 15% 11 23% 17 25% 19 20% 15 8% 6 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 17% 7 7% 3 32% 13 17% 7 15% 6 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 16% 3 5% 1 16% 3 26% 5 21% 4 16% 3 0% 0 100% 19 Total 8% 95 10% 128 13% 164 22% 275 22% 270 18% 220 6% 71 100% 1223 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q1-3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 4% 41 7% 64 9% 80 14% 129 20% 189 35% 326 12% 111 100% 940 Black 7% 9 6% 8 12% 17 25% 34 18% 24 26% 36 7% 9 100% 137 Hisp 12% 9 16% 12 12% 9 19% 14 20% 15 17% 13 4% 3 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 5% 2 12% 5 22% 9 27% 11 22% 9 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 29% 2 14% 1 100% 7 Other 17% 3 6% 1 11% 2 6% 1 11% 2 44% 8 6% 1 100% 18 Total 5% 65 7% 88 9% 114 15% 188 20% 242 32% 394 10% 127 100% 1218 Q1-3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 4% 41 7% 64 9% 80 14% 129 20% 189 35% 326 12% 111 100% 940 Black 7% 9 6% 8 12% 17 25% 34 18% 24 26% 36 7% 9 100% 137 Hisp 12% 9 16% 12 12% 9 19% 14 20% 15 17% 13 4% 3 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 5% 2 12% 5 22% 9 27% 11 22% 9 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 29% 2 14% 1 100% 7 Other 17% 3 6% 1 11% 2 6% 1 11% 2 44% 8 6% 1 100% 18 Total 5% 65 7% 88 9% 114 15% 188 20% 242 32% 394 10% 127 100% 1218 Q1P4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 3% 24 5% 51 6% 54 19% 179 25% 234 32% 302 10% 95 100% 939 Black 6% 8 6% 9 8% 11 24% 34 26% 36 22% 31 7% 10 100% 139 Hisp 4% 3 8% 6 16% 12 16% 12 18% 13 27% 20 11% 8 100% 74 Asian 2% 1 5% 2 15% 6 15% 6 29% 12 24% 10 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 100% 7 Other 0% 0 6% 1 17% 3 17% 3 33% 6 22% 4 6% 1 100% 18 Total 3% 36 6% 69 7% 87 19% 235 25% 302 30% 370 10% 119 100% 1218 Q1P4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 3% 24 5% 51 6% 54 19% 179 25% 234 32% 302 10% 95 100% 939 Black 6% 8 6% 9 8% 11 24% 34 26% 36 22% 31 7% 10 100% 139 Hisp 4% 3 8% 6 16% 12 16% 12 18% 13 27% 20 11% 8 100% 74 Asian 2% 1 5% 2 15% 6 15% 6 29% 12 24% 10 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 100% 7 Other 0% 0 6% 1 17% 3 17% 3 33% 6 22% 4 6% 1 100% 18 Total 3% 36 6% 69 7% 87 19% 235 25% 302 30% 370 10% 119 100% 1218 Q1-5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 3% 30 8% 74 10% 88 23% 207 23% 213 25% 227 8% 77 100% 916 Black 3% 4 6% 8 6% 8 27% 35 25% 32 27% 34 5% 7 100% 128 Hisp 8% 6 13% 10 17% 13 16% 12 19% 14 20% 15 7% 5 100% 75 Asian 5% 2 10% 4 20% 8 24% 10 27% 11 10% 4 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 57% 4 14% 1 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 6% 1 11% 2 17% 3 17% 3 22% 4 28% 5 0% 0 100% 18 Total 4% 43 8% 98 10% 120 23% 271 23% 275 24% 287 8% 91 100% 1185 Q1-5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 3% 30 8% 74 10% 88 23% 207 23% 213 25% 227 8% 77 100% 916 Black 3% 4 6% 8 6% 8 27% 35 25% 32 27% 34 5% 7 100% 128 Hisp 8% 6 13% 10 17% 13 16% 12 19% 14 20% 15 7% 5 100% 75 Asian 5% 2 10% 4 20% 8 24% 10 27% 11 10% 4 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 57% 4 14% 1 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 6% 1 11% 2 17% 3 17% 3 22% 4 28% 5 0% 0 100% 18 Total 4% 43 8% 98 10% 120 23% 271 23% 275 24% 287 8% 91 100% 1185 PAGE D-3 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-4 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q1-6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 3% 31 7% 62 10% 91 16% 147 22% 205 31% 288 12% 115 100% 939 Black 6% 9 11% 15 12% 16 19% 27 20% 28 26% 36 6% 8 100% 139 Hisp 5% 4 12% 9 21% 16 19% 14 19% 14 17% 13 7% 5 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 10% 4 17% 7 20% 8 17% 7 22% 9 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 14% 1 0% 0 29% 2 0% 0 43% 3 14% 1 100% 7 Other 16% 3 5% 1 21% 4 0% 0 26% 5 32% 6 0% 0 100% 19 Total 4% 50 8% 92 11% 134 16% 198 21% 259 29% 355 11% 132 100% 1220 Q1-6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 3% 31 7% 62 10% 91 16% 147 22% 205 31% 288 12% 115 100% 939 Black 6% 9 11% 15 12% 16 19% 27 20% 28 26% 36 6% 8 100% 139 Hisp 5% 4 12% 9 21% 16 19% 14 19% 14 17% 13 7% 5 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 10% 4 17% 7 20% 8 17% 7 22% 9 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 14% 1 0% 0 29% 2 0% 0 43% 3 14% 1 100% 7 Other 16% 3 5% 1 21% 4 0% 0 26% 5 32% 6 0% 0 100% 19 Total 4% 50 8% 92 11% 134 16% 198 21% 259 29% 355 11% 132 100% 1220 Q1-7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 5% 47 7% 67 11% 106 15% 145 24% 226 27% 258 10% 90 100% 939 Black 8% 11 19% 26 12% 17 16% 23 19% 27 21% 29 5% 7 100% 140 Hisp 8% 6 12% 9 23% 17 24% 18 12% 9 16% 12 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 13% 5 10% 4 25% 10 18% 7 20% 8 5% 2 100% 40 Ind 0% 0 14% 1 0% 0 29% 2 0% 0 29% 2 29% 2 100% 7 Other 21% 4 16% 3 11% 2 5% 1 16% 3 32% 6 0% 0 100% 19 Total 6% 72 9% 111 12% 146 16% 199 22% 272 26% 315 9% 105 100% 1220 Q1-7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total White 5% 47 7% 67 11% 106 15% 145 24% 226 27% 258 10% 90 100% 939 Black 8% 11 19% 26 12% 17 16% 23 19% 27 21% 29 5% 7 100% 140 Hisp 8% 6 12% 9 23% 17 24% 18 12% 9 16% 12 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 13% 5 10% 4 25% 10 18% 7 20% 8 5% 2 100% 40 Ind 0% 0 14% 1 0% 0 29% 2 0% 0 29% 2 29% 2 100% 7 Other 21% 4 16% 3 11% 2 5% 1 16% 3 32% 6 0% 0 100% 19 Total 6% 72 9% 111 12% 146 16% 199 22% 272 26% 315 9% 105 100% 1220 Q2-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 3% 30 9% 83 43% 407 44% 411 1% 12 100% 943 Black 6% 9 13% 18 56% 79 22% 31 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 3% 2 17% 13 40% 30 37% 28 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 12% 5 12% 5 37% 15 37% 15 2% 1 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 29% 2 29% 2 43% 3 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 13% 3 39% 9 22% 5 22% 5 100% 23 Total 4% 47 10% 124 44% 542 40% 493 2% 23 100% 1229 Q2-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 3% 30 9% 83 43% 407 44% 411 1% 12 100% 943 Black 6% 9 13% 18 56% 79 22% 31 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 3% 2 17% 13 40% 30 37% 28 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 12% 5 12% 5 37% 15 37% 15 2% 1 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 29% 2 29% 2 43% 3 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 13% 3 39% 9 22% 5 22% 5 100% 23 Total 4% 47 10% 124 44% 542 40% 493 2% 23 100% 1229 PAGE D-4 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-5 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q2-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 40 13% 123 44% 411 34% 323 5% 46 100% 943 Black 21% 29 25% 35 37% 52 14% 20 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 11% 8 23% 17 41% 31 23% 17 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 17% 7 44% 18 32% 13 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 9% 2 4% 1 35% 8 30% 7 22% 5 100% 23 Total 7% 84 15% 184 43% 523 31% 381 5% 57 100% 1229 Q2-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 40 13% 123 44% 411 34% 323 5% 46 100% 943 Black 21% 29 25% 35 37% 52 14% 20 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 11% 8 23% 17 41% 31 23% 17 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 17% 7 44% 18 32% 13 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 9% 2 4% 1 35% 8 30% 7 22% 5 100% 23 Total 7% 84 15% 184 43% 523 31% 381 5% 57 100% 1229 Q3-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 5% 49 9% 87 39% 365 46% 432 1% 10 100% 943 Black 9% 12 24% 34 45% 63 20% 28 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 7% 5 16% 12 33% 25 37% 28 7% 5 100% 75 Asian 15% 6 12% 5 41% 17 32% 13 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 14% 1 29% 2 43% 3 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 9% 2 39% 9 26% 6 22% 5 100% 23 Total 6% 74 11% 141 39% 481 41% 510 2% 23 100% 1229 Q3-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 5% 49 9% 87 39% 365 46% 432 1% 10 100% 943 Black 9% 12 24% 34 45% 63 20% 28 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 7% 5 16% 12 33% 25 37% 28 7% 5 100% 75 Asian 15% 6 12% 5 41% 17 32% 13 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 14% 1 29% 2 43% 3 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 9% 2 39% 9 26% 6 22% 5 100% 23 Total 6% 74 11% 141 39% 481 41% 510 2% 23 100% 1229 Q3-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 2% 21 11% 108 41% 387 42% 398 3% 29 100% 943 Black 30% 42 30% 42 26% 37 11% 16 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 16% 12 24% 18 33% 25 24% 18 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 15% 6 51% 21 24% 10 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 14% 1 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 13% 3 30% 7 30% 7 22% 5 100% 23 Total 7% 81 14% 178 39% 480 37% 451 3% 39 100% 1229 Q3-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 2% 21 11% 108 41% 387 42% 398 3% 29 100% 943 Black 30% 42 30% 42 26% 37 11% 16 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 16% 12 24% 18 33% 25 24% 18 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 15% 6 51% 21 24% 10 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 14% 1 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 13% 3 30% 7 30% 7 22% 5 100% 23 Total 7% 81 14% 178 39% 480 37% 451 3% 39 100% 1229 PAGE D-5 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-6 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q3-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 35 8% 71 38% 362 48% 451 3% 24 100% 943 Black 5% 7 4% 6 38% 53 46% 64 7% 10 100% 140 Hisp 5% 4 9% 7 37% 28 43% 32 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 0% 0 12% 5 44% 18 37% 15 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 43% 3 43% 3 14% 1 100% 7 Other 9% 2 4% 1 39% 9 26% 6 22% 5 100% 23 Total 4% 48 7% 90 38% 473 46% 571 4% 47 100% 1229 Q3-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 35 8% 71 38% 362 48% 451 3% 24 100% 943 Black 5% 7 4% 6 38% 53 46% 64 7% 10 100% 140 Hisp 5% 4 9% 7 37% 28 43% 32 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 0% 0 12% 5 44% 18 37% 15 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 43% 3 43% 3 14% 1 100% 7 Other 9% 2 4% 1 39% 9 26% 6 22% 5 100% 23 Total 4% 48 7% 90 38% 473 46% 571 4% 47 100% 1229 Q3-4 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 7% 62 21% 194 39% 369 26% 241 8% 77 100% 943 Black 14% 19 18% 25 34% 47 9% 13 26% 36 100% 140 Hisp 15% 11 28% 21 29% 22 20% 15 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 15% 6 27% 11 37% 15 12% 5 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 14% 1 43% 3 0% 0 14% 1 100% 7 Other 17% 4 9% 2 30% 7 22% 5 22% 5 100% 23 Total 8% 104 21% 254 38% 463 23% 279 10% 129 100% 1229 Q3-4 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 7% 62 21% 194 39% 369 26% 241 8% 77 100% 943 Black 14% 19 18% 25 34% 47 9% 13 26% 36 100% 140 Hisp 15% 11 28% 21 29% 22 20% 15 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 15% 6 27% 11 37% 15 12% 5 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 14% 1 43% 3 0% 0 14% 1 100% 7 Other 17% 4 9% 2 30% 7 22% 5 22% 5 100% 23 Total 8% 104 21% 254 38% 463 23% 279 10% 129 100% 1229 Q4-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 45% 429 43% 410 7% 67 2% 21 2% 16 100% 943 Black 23% 32 55% 77 16% 22 4% 6 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 36% 27 49% 37 8% 6 3% 2 4% 3 100% 75 Asian 32% 13 56% 23 10% 4 2% 1 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 39% 9 30% 7 9% 2 0% 0 22% 5 100% 23 Total 42% 513 45% 557 8% 102 2% 30 2% 27 100% 1229 Q4-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 45% 429 43% 410 7% 67 2% 21 2% 16 100% 943 Black 23% 32 55% 77 16% 22 4% 6 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 36% 27 49% 37 8% 6 3% 2 4% 3 100% 75 Asian 32% 13 56% 23 10% 4 2% 1 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 39% 9 30% 7 9% 2 0% 0 22% 5 100% 23 Total 42% 513 45% 557 8% 102 2% 30 2% 27 100% 1229 PAGE D-6 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-7 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q4-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 34% 317 46% 438 13% 119 3% 26 5% 43 100% 943 Black 11% 16 45% 63 29% 41 11% 16 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 27% 20 36% 27 28% 21 7% 5 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 22% 9 54% 22 20% 8 5% 2 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 29% 2 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 35% 8 26% 6 13% 3 4% 1 22% 5 100% 23 Total 30% 373 45% 558 16% 193 4% 51 4% 54 100% 1229 Q4-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 34% 317 46% 438 13% 119 3% 26 5% 43 100% 943 Black 11% 16 45% 63 29% 41 11% 16 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 27% 20 36% 27 28% 21 7% 5 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 22% 9 54% 22 20% 8 5% 2 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 29% 2 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 35% 8 26% 6 13% 3 4% 1 22% 5 100% 23 Total 30% 373 45% 558 16% 193 4% 51 4% 54 100% 1229 Q4-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 18% 171 48% 448 25% 233 8% 78 1% 13 100% 943 Black 11% 16 37% 52 36% 51 12% 17 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 16% 12 28% 21 43% 32 11% 8 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 54% 22 24% 10 12% 5 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 22% 5 35% 8 9% 2 17% 4 17% 4 100% 23 Total 17% 210 45% 554 27% 330 9% 112 2% 23 100% 1229 Q4-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 18% 171 48% 448 25% 233 8% 78 1% 13 100% 943 Black 11% 16 37% 52 36% 51 12% 17 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 16% 12 28% 21 43% 32 11% 8 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 54% 22 24% 10 12% 5 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 22% 5 35% 8 9% 2 17% 4 17% 4 100% 23 Total 17% 210 45% 554 27% 330 9% 112 2% 23 100% 1229 Q4-4 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 14% 132 46% 431 27% 259 6% 55 7% 66 100% 943 Black 4% 5 43% 60 27% 38 6% 8 21% 29 100% 140 Hisp 12% 9 40% 30 32% 24 8% 6 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 46% 19 34% 14 12% 5 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 100% 7 Other 9% 2 30% 7 30% 7 4% 1 26% 6 100% 23 Total 12% 152 45% 550 28% 343 6% 76 9% 108 100% 1229 Q4-4 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 14% 132 46% 431 27% 259 6% 55 7% 66 100% 943 Black 4% 5 43% 60 27% 38 6% 8 21% 29 100% 140 Hisp 12% 9 40% 30 32% 24 8% 6 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 46% 19 34% 14 12% 5 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 100% 7 Other 9% 2 30% 7 30% 7 4% 1 26% 6 100% 23 Total 12% 152 45% 550 28% 343 6% 76 9% 108 100% 1229 PAGE D-7 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-8 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q5 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 41% 386 36% 343 14% 133 7% 64 2% 17 100% 943 Black 15% 21 36% 51 24% 34 24% 33 1% 1 100% 140 Hisp 27% 20 29% 22 27% 20 16% 12 1% 1 100% 75 Asian 37% 15 27% 11 20% 8 17% 7 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 29% 2 14% 1 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 26% 6 26% 6 9% 2 22% 5 17% 4 100% 23 Total 37% 450 35% 435 16% 198 10% 123 2% 23 100% 1229 Q5 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 41% 386 36% 343 14% 133 7% 64 2% 17 100% 943 Black 15% 21 36% 51 24% 34 24% 33 1% 1 100% 140 Hisp 27% 20 29% 22 27% 20 16% 12 1% 1 100% 75 Asian 37% 15 27% 11 20% 8 17% 7 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 29% 2 14% 1 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 26% 6 26% 6 9% 2 22% 5 17% 4 100% 23 Total 37% 450 35% 435 16% 198 10% 123 2% 23 100% 1229 Q6 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 52% 491 36% 339 7% 66 3% 25 2% 22 100% 943 Black 31% 44 48% 67 9% 13 6% 9 5% 7 100% 140 Hisp 40% 30 37% 28 16% 12 1% 1 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 41% 17 46% 19 7% 3 2% 1 2% 1 100% 41 Ind 57% 4 29% 2 14% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 30% 7 43% 10 4% 1 4% 1 17% 4 100% 23 Total 48% 593 38% 465 8% 96 3% 37 3% 38 100% 1229 Q6 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 52% 491 36% 339 7% 66 3% 25 2% 22 100% 943 Black 31% 44 48% 67 9% 13 6% 9 5% 7 100% 140 Hisp 40% 30 37% 28 16% 12 1% 1 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 41% 17 46% 19 7% 3 2% 1 2% 1 100% 41 Ind 57% 4 29% 2 14% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 30% 7 43% 10 4% 1 4% 1 17% 4 100% 23 Total 48% 593 38% 465 8% 96 3% 37 3% 38 100% 1229 Q7 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 24% 225 38% 359 17% 164 8% 73 13% 122 100% 943 Black 9% 12 21% 30 25% 35 28% 39 17% 24 100% 140 Hisp 13% 10 32% 24 27% 20 19% 14 9% 7 100% 75 Asian 22% 9 27% 11 22% 9 17% 7 12% 5 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 57% 4 29% 2 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 17% 4 17% 4 17% 4 30% 7 100% 23 Total 21% 260 35% 432 19% 234 11% 138 13% 165 100% 1229 Q7 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 24% 225 38% 359 17% 164 8% 73 13% 122 100% 943 Black 9% 12 21% 30 25% 35 28% 39 17% 24 100% 140 Hisp 13% 10 32% 24 27% 20 19% 14 9% 7 100% 75 Asian 22% 9 27% 11 22% 9 17% 7 12% 5 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 57% 4 29% 2 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 17% 4 17% 4 17% 4 30% 7 100% 23 Total 21% 260 35% 432 19% 234 11% 138 13% 165 100% 1229 PAGE D-8 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-9 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q8 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 47% 445 39% 366 8% 78 3% 29 3% 25 100% 943 Black 36% 50 49% 68 9% 12 4% 6 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 36% 27 37% 28 11% 8 8% 6 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 37% 15 46% 19 10% 4 7% 3 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 71% 5 14% 1 0% 0 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 35% 8 22% 5 13% 3 13% 3 17% 4 100% 23 Total 45% 550 40% 487 9% 105 4% 48 3% 39 100% 1229 Q8 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 47% 445 39% 366 8% 78 3% 29 3% 25 100% 943 Black 36% 50 49% 68 9% 12 4% 6 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 36% 27 37% 28 11% 8 8% 6 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 37% 15 46% 19 10% 4 7% 3 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 71% 5 14% 1 0% 0 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 35% 8 22% 5 13% 3 13% 3 17% 4 100% 23 Total 45% 550 40% 487 9% 105 4% 48 3% 39 100% 1229 Q10 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 26% 248 50% 473 18% 166 2% 23 3% 33 100% 943 Black 16% 23 44% 62 29% 41 6% 8 4% 6 100% 140 Hisp 16% 12 51% 38 25% 19 4% 3 4% 3 100% 75 Asian 27% 11 32% 13 24% 10 5% 2 12% 5 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 48% 11 13% 3 0% 0 22% 5 100% 23 Total 24% 300 49% 600 20% 240 3% 37 4% 52 100% 1229 Q10 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 26% 248 50% 473 18% 166 2% 23 3% 33 100% 943 Black 16% 23 44% 62 29% 41 6% 8 4% 6 100% 140 Hisp 16% 12 51% 38 25% 19 4% 3 4% 3 100% 75 Asian 27% 11 32% 13 24% 10 5% 2 12% 5 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 48% 11 13% 3 0% 0 22% 5 100% 23 Total 24% 300 49% 600 20% 240 3% 37 4% 52 100% 1229 Q11 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 38% 359 43% 406 13% 124 5% 44 1% 10 100% 943 Black 22% 31 48% 67 19% 27 9% 13 1% 2 100% 140 Hisp 29% 22 31% 23 24% 18 13% 10 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 34% 14 32% 13 22% 9 12% 5 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 39% 9 13% 3 17% 4 17% 4 100% 23 Total 35% 431 42% 521 15% 182 6% 77 1% 18 100% 1229 Q11 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 38% 359 43% 406 13% 124 5% 44 1% 10 100% 943 Black 22% 31 48% 67 19% 27 9% 13 1% 2 100% 140 Hisp 29% 22 31% 23 24% 18 13% 10 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 34% 14 32% 13 22% 9 12% 5 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 39% 9 13% 3 17% 4 17% 4 100% 23 Total 35% 431 42% 521 15% 182 6% 77 1% 18 100% 1229 PAGE D-9 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-10 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q12-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 38% 361 44% 419 9% 88 5% 47 3% 28 100% 943 Black 20% 28 48% 67 11% 16 15% 21 6% 8 100% 140 Hisp 24% 18 48% 36 13% 10 12% 9 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 41% 17 34% 14 17% 7 7% 3 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 57% 4 29% 2 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 43% 10 4% 1 17% 4 17% 4 100% 23 Total 35% 429 45% 550 10% 124 7% 84 3% 42 100% 1229 Q12-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 38% 361 44% 419 9% 88 5% 47 3% 28 100% 943 Black 20% 28 48% 67 11% 16 15% 21 6% 8 100% 140 Hisp 24% 18 48% 36 13% 10 12% 9 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 41% 17 34% 14 17% 7 7% 3 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 57% 4 29% 2 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 43% 10 4% 1 17% 4 17% 4 100% 23 Total 35% 429 45% 550 10% 124 7% 84 3% 42 100% 1229 Q12-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 10% 92 19% 178 31% 297 37% 351 3% 25 100% 943 Black 4% 6 16% 23 34% 47 37% 52 9% 12 100% 140 Hisp 9% 7 19% 14 31% 23 39% 29 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 20% 8 32% 13 34% 14 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 14% 1 29% 2 57% 4 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 13% 3 17% 4 43% 10 22% 5 100% 23 Total 9% 109 18% 227 31% 386 37% 460 4% 47 100% 1229 Q12-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 10% 92 19% 178 31% 297 37% 351 3% 25 100% 943 Black 4% 6 16% 23 34% 47 37% 52 9% 12 100% 140 Hisp 9% 7 19% 14 31% 23 39% 29 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 20% 8 32% 13 34% 14 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 14% 1 29% 2 57% 4 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 13% 3 17% 4 43% 10 22% 5 100% 23 Total 9% 109 18% 227 31% 386 37% 460 4% 47 100% 1229 Q13 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 34% 318 54% 512 9% 86 2% 20 1% 7 100% 943 Black 29% 40 56% 78 13% 18 2% 3 1% 1 100% 140 Hisp 29% 22 51% 38 17% 13 3% 2 0% 0 100% 75 Asian 37% 15 44% 18 15% 6 5% 2 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 86% 6 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 52% 12 9% 2 0% 0 22% 5 100% 23 Total 33% 400 54% 664 10% 125 2% 27 1% 13 100% 1229 Q13 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 34% 318 54% 512 9% 86 2% 20 1% 7 100% 943 Black 29% 40 56% 78 13% 18 2% 3 1% 1 100% 140 Hisp 29% 22 51% 38 17% 13 3% 2 0% 0 100% 75 Asian 37% 15 44% 18 15% 6 5% 2 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 86% 6 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 52% 12 9% 2 0% 0 22% 5 100% 23 Total 33% 400 54% 664 10% 125 2% 27 1% 13 100% 1229 PAGE D-10 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-11 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q14-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 36% 336 43% 410 13% 118 6% 61 2% 18 100% 943 Black 29% 41 37% 52 19% 26 7% 10 8% 11 100% 140 Hisp 24% 18 45% 34 20% 15 11% 8 0% 0 100% 75 Asian 32% 13 46% 19 12% 5 10% 4 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 29% 2 29% 2 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 26% 6 30% 7 13% 3 13% 3 17% 4 100% 23 Total 34% 417 43% 524 14% 169 7% 86 3% 33 100% 1229 Q14-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 36% 336 43% 410 13% 118 6% 61 2% 18 100% 943 Black 29% 41 37% 52 19% 26 7% 10 8% 11 100% 140 Hisp 24% 18 45% 34 20% 15 11% 8 0% 0 100% 75 Asian 32% 13 46% 19 12% 5 10% 4 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 29% 2 29% 2 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 26% 6 30% 7 13% 3 13% 3 17% 4 100% 23 Total 34% 417 43% 524 14% 169 7% 86 3% 33 100% 1229 Q14-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 45% 425 35% 334 7% 70 6% 54 6% 60 100% 943 Black 38% 53 38% 53 6% 9 6% 8 12% 17 100% 140 Hisp 32% 24 44% 33 7% 5 8% 6 9% 7 100% 75 Asian 34% 14 39% 16 5% 2 12% 5 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 14% 1 14% 1 100% 7 Other 30% 7 39% 9 13% 3 0% 0 17% 4 100% 23 Total 43% 526 36% 447 7% 89 6% 74 8% 93 100% 1229 Q14-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 45% 425 35% 334 7% 70 6% 54 6% 60 100% 943 Black 38% 53 38% 53 6% 9 6% 8 12% 17 100% 140 Hisp 32% 24 44% 33 7% 5 8% 6 9% 7 100% 75 Asian 34% 14 39% 16 5% 2 12% 5 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 14% 1 14% 1 100% 7 Other 30% 7 39% 9 13% 3 0% 0 17% 4 100% 23 Total 43% 526 36% 447 7% 89 6% 74 8% 93 100% 1229 Q15 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 20% 187 44% 414 12% 116 6% 56 18% 170 100% 943 Black 6% 9 28% 39 32% 45 23% 32 11% 15 100% 140 Hisp 20% 15 31% 23 31% 23 11% 8 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 17% 7 37% 15 22% 9 7% 3 17% 7 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 100% 7 Other 4% 1 43% 10 13% 3 9% 2 30% 7 100% 23 Total 18% 220 41% 504 16% 197 8% 102 17% 206 100% 1229 Q15 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 20% 187 44% 414 12% 116 6% 56 18% 170 100% 943 Black 6% 9 28% 39 32% 45 23% 32 11% 15 100% 140 Hisp 20% 15 31% 23 31% 23 11% 8 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 17% 7 37% 15 22% 9 7% 3 17% 7 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 100% 7 Other 4% 1 43% 10 13% 3 9% 2 30% 7 100% 23 Total 18% 220 41% 504 16% 197 8% 102 17% 206 100% 1229 PAGE D-11 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-12 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q16 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 26% 246 47% 441 19% 177 6% 55 3% 24 100% 943 Black 16% 23 39% 54 21% 30 16% 23 7% 10 100% 140 Hisp 20% 15 39% 29 20% 15 19% 14 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 29% 12 34% 14 17% 7 15% 6 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 29% 2 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 9% 2 39% 9 22% 5 9% 2 22% 5 100% 23 Total 24% 301 45% 549 19% 235 8% 101 3% 43 100% 1229 Q16 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 26% 246 47% 441 19% 177 6% 55 3% 24 100% 943 Black 16% 23 39% 54 21% 30 16% 23 7% 10 100% 140 Hisp 20% 15 39% 29 20% 15 19% 14 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 29% 12 34% 14 17% 7 15% 6 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 43% 3 29% 2 14% 1 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 9% 2 39% 9 22% 5 9% 2 22% 5 100% 23 Total 24% 301 45% 549 19% 235 8% 101 3% 43 100% 1229 Q17 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 29% 270 46% 436 16% 147 6% 57 3% 33 100% 943 Black 21% 30 34% 48 20% 28 19% 26 6% 8 100% 140 Hisp 16% 12 37% 28 25% 19 16% 12 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 24% 10 39% 16 22% 9 15% 6 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 29% 2 29% 2 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 9% 2 48% 11 13% 3 13% 3 17% 4 100% 23 Total 26% 325 44% 541 17% 208 9% 106 4% 49 100% 1229 Q17 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 29% 270 46% 436 16% 147 6% 57 3% 33 100% 943 Black 21% 30 34% 48 20% 28 19% 26 6% 8 100% 140 Hisp 16% 12 37% 28 25% 19 16% 12 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 24% 10 39% 16 22% 9 15% 6 0% 0 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 29% 2 29% 2 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 9% 2 48% 11 13% 3 13% 3 17% 4 100% 23 Total 26% 325 44% 541 17% 208 9% 106 4% 49 100% 1229 Q18-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 21% 195 28% 265 24% 227 10% 95 17% 161 100% 943 Black 9% 13 25% 35 24% 34 26% 37 15% 21 100% 140 Hisp 12% 9 19% 14 27% 20 13% 10 29% 22 100% 75 Asian 20% 8 32% 13 24% 10 10% 4 15% 6 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 29% 2 29% 2 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 30% 7 17% 4 9% 2 30% 7 100% 23 Total 19% 229 27% 336 24% 297 12% 150 18% 217 100% 1229 Q18-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 21% 195 28% 265 24% 227 10% 95 17% 161 100% 943 Black 9% 13 25% 35 24% 34 26% 37 15% 21 100% 140 Hisp 12% 9 19% 14 27% 20 13% 10 29% 22 100% 75 Asian 20% 8 32% 13 24% 10 10% 4 15% 6 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 29% 2 29% 2 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 30% 7 17% 4 9% 2 30% 7 100% 23 Total 19% 229 27% 336 24% 297 12% 150 18% 217 100% 1229 PAGE D-12 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-13 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q18-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 18% 170 24% 225 18% 167 9% 89 31% 292 100% 943 Black 12% 17 15% 21 19% 27 24% 33 30% 42 100% 140 Hisp 11% 8 13% 10 21% 16 17% 13 37% 28 100% 75 Asian 20% 8 17% 7 24% 10 10% 4 29% 12 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 29% 2 29% 2 100% 7 Other 13% 3 22% 5 9% 2 17% 4 39% 9 100% 23 Total 17% 207 22% 269 18% 223 12% 145 31% 385 100% 1229 Q18-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 18% 170 24% 225 18% 167 9% 89 31% 292 100% 943 Black 12% 17 15% 21 19% 27 24% 33 30% 42 100% 140 Hisp 11% 8 13% 10 21% 16 17% 13 37% 28 100% 75 Asian 20% 8 17% 7 24% 10 10% 4 29% 12 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 14% 1 14% 1 29% 2 29% 2 100% 7 Other 13% 3 22% 5 9% 2 17% 4 39% 9 100% 23 Total 17% 207 22% 269 18% 223 12% 145 31% 385 100% 1229 Q18-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 20% 189 29% 276 17% 157 9% 89 25% 232 100% 943 Black 13% 18 28% 39 17% 24 21% 30 21% 29 100% 140 Hisp 11% 8 17% 13 23% 17 12% 9 37% 28 100% 75 Asian 17% 7 27% 11 24% 10 15% 6 17% 7 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 71% 5 0% 0 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 9% 2 35% 8 9% 2 13% 3 35% 8 100% 23 Total 18% 224 29% 352 17% 210 11% 139 25% 304 100% 1229 Q18-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 20% 189 29% 276 17% 157 9% 89 25% 232 100% 943 Black 13% 18 28% 39 17% 24 21% 30 21% 29 100% 140 Hisp 11% 8 17% 13 23% 17 12% 9 37% 28 100% 75 Asian 17% 7 27% 11 24% 10 15% 6 17% 7 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 71% 5 0% 0 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 9% 2 35% 8 9% 2 13% 3 35% 8 100% 23 Total 18% 224 29% 352 17% 210 11% 139 25% 304 100% 1229 Q19-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 8% 71 12% 112 30% 281 42% 396 9% 83 100% 943 Black 20% 28 24% 33 31% 44 16% 22 9% 13 100% 140 Hisp 15% 11 12% 9 25% 19 37% 28 11% 8 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 15% 6 39% 16 27% 11 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 13% 3 13% 3 22% 5 35% 8 100% 23 Total 10% 119 13% 165 30% 366 38% 463 9% 116 100% 1229 Q19-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 8% 71 12% 112 30% 281 42% 396 9% 83 100% 943 Black 20% 28 24% 33 31% 44 16% 22 9% 13 100% 140 Hisp 15% 11 12% 9 25% 19 37% 28 11% 8 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 15% 6 39% 16 27% 11 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 13% 3 13% 3 22% 5 35% 8 100% 23 Total 10% 119 13% 165 30% 366 38% 463 9% 116 100% 1229 PAGE D-13 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-14 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q19-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 8% 71 12% 112 30% 281 42% 396 9% 83 100% 943 Black 20% 28 24% 33 31% 44 16% 22 9% 13 100% 140 Hisp 15% 11 12% 9 25% 19 37% 28 11% 8 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 15% 6 39% 16 27% 11 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 13% 3 13% 3 22% 5 35% 8 100% 23 Total 10% 119 13% 165 30% 366 38% 463 9% 116 100% 1229 Q19-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 8% 71 12% 112 30% 281 42% 396 9% 83 100% 943 Black 20% 28 24% 33 31% 44 16% 22 9% 13 100% 140 Hisp 15% 11 12% 9 25% 19 37% 28 11% 8 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 15% 6 39% 16 27% 11 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 29% 2 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 17% 4 13% 3 13% 3 22% 5 35% 8 100% 23 Total 10% 119 13% 165 30% 366 38% 463 9% 116 100% 1229 Q19-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 35 9% 84 32% 305 43% 402 12% 117 100% 943 Black 28% 39 22% 31 23% 32 15% 21 12% 17 100% 140 Hisp 15% 11 20% 15 21% 16 36% 27 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 20% 8 37% 15 27% 11 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 13% 3 17% 4 26% 6 30% 7 100% 23 Total 8% 93 12% 142 31% 375 38% 468 12% 151 100% 1229 Q19-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 35 9% 84 32% 305 43% 402 12% 117 100% 943 Black 28% 39 22% 31 23% 32 15% 21 12% 17 100% 140 Hisp 15% 11 20% 15 21% 16 36% 27 8% 6 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 20% 8 37% 15 27% 11 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 13% 3 17% 4 26% 6 30% 7 100% 23 Total 8% 93 12% 142 31% 375 38% 468 12% 151 100% 1229 Q20 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 11% 102 40% 378 19% 179 11% 103 19% 181 100% 943 Black 7% 10 36% 50 21% 29 12% 17 24% 34 100% 140 Hisp 9% 7 37% 28 24% 18 8% 6 21% 16 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 24% 10 29% 12 12% 5 24% 10 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 43% 3 29% 2 14% 1 14% 1 100% 7 Other 4% 1 17% 4 22% 5 17% 4 39% 9 100% 23 Total 10% 124 38% 473 20% 245 11% 136 20% 251 100% 1229 Q20 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 11% 102 40% 378 19% 179 11% 103 19% 181 100% 943 Black 7% 10 36% 50 21% 29 12% 17 24% 34 100% 140 Hisp 9% 7 37% 28 24% 18 8% 6 21% 16 100% 75 Asian 10% 4 24% 10 29% 12 12% 5 24% 10 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 43% 3 29% 2 14% 1 14% 1 100% 7 Other 4% 1 17% 4 22% 5 17% 4 39% 9 100% 23 Total 10% 124 38% 473 20% 245 11% 136 20% 251 100% 1229 PAGE D-14 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-15 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q21 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 6% 56 13% 124 37% 351 30% 283 14% 129 100% 943 Black 7% 10 13% 18 31% 44 23% 32 26% 36 100% 140 Hisp 8% 6 8% 6 36% 27 24% 18 24% 18 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 22% 9 37% 15 12% 5 22% 9 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 0% 0 71% 5 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 0% 0 13% 3 43% 10 13% 3 30% 7 100% 23 Total 6% 76 13% 160 37% 452 28% 342 16% 199 100% 1229 Q21 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 6% 56 13% 124 37% 351 30% 283 14% 129 100% 943 Black 7% 10 13% 18 31% 44 23% 32 26% 36 100% 140 Hisp 8% 6 8% 6 36% 27 24% 18 24% 18 100% 75 Asian 7% 3 22% 9 37% 15 12% 5 22% 9 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 0% 0 71% 5 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 0% 0 13% 3 43% 10 13% 3 30% 7 100% 23 Total 6% 76 13% 160 37% 452 28% 342 16% 199 100% 1229 Q22 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 9% 88 11% 105 4% 40 2% 18 73% 692 100% 943 Black 2% 3 9% 13 9% 13 9% 12 71% 99 100% 140 Hisp 7% 5 8% 6 9% 7 5% 4 71% 53 100% 75 Asian 2% 1 5% 2 5% 2 5% 2 83% 34 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 43% 3 0% 0 14% 1 43% 3 100% 7 Other 0% 0 22% 5 0% 0 0% 0 78% 18 100% 23 Total 8% 97 11% 134 5% 62 3% 37 73% 899 100% 1229 Q22 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 9% 88 11% 105 4% 40 2% 18 73% 692 100% 943 Black 2% 3 9% 13 9% 13 9% 12 71% 99 100% 140 Hisp 7% 5 8% 6 9% 7 5% 4 71% 53 100% 75 Asian 2% 1 5% 2 5% 2 5% 2 83% 34 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 43% 3 0% 0 14% 1 43% 3 100% 7 Other 0% 0 22% 5 0% 0 0% 0 78% 18 100% 23 Total 8% 97 11% 134 5% 62 3% 37 73% 899 100% 1229 Q23 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 39% 371 44% 412 8% 78 3% 29 6% 53 100% 943 Black 31% 43 44% 61 10% 14 3% 4 13% 18 100% 140 Hisp 28% 21 41% 31 5% 4 12% 9 13% 10 100% 75 Asian 27% 11 39% 16 27% 11 0% 0 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 57% 4 29% 2 14% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 26% 6 26% 6 9% 2 13% 3 26% 6 100% 23 Total 37% 456 43% 528 9% 110 4% 45 7% 90 100% 1229 Q23 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 39% 371 44% 412 8% 78 3% 29 6% 53 100% 943 Black 31% 43 44% 61 10% 14 3% 4 13% 18 100% 140 Hisp 28% 21 41% 31 5% 4 12% 9 13% 10 100% 75 Asian 27% 11 39% 16 27% 11 0% 0 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 57% 4 29% 2 14% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 26% 6 26% 6 9% 2 13% 3 26% 6 100% 23 Total 37% 456 43% 528 9% 110 4% 45 7% 90 100% 1229 PAGE D-15 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-16 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q24 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 38% 359 49% 460 10% 91 2% 23 1% 10 100% 943 Black 26% 37 45% 63 21% 30 4% 6 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 28% 21 40% 30 21% 16 8% 6 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 34% 14 39% 16 10% 4 12% 5 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 22% 5 35% 8 17% 4 9% 2 17% 4 100% 23 Total 36% 438 47% 580 12% 147 3% 42 2% 22 100% 1229 Q24 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 38% 359 49% 460 10% 91 2% 23 1% 10 100% 943 Black 26% 37 45% 63 21% 30 4% 6 3% 4 100% 140 Hisp 28% 21 40% 30 21% 16 8% 6 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 34% 14 39% 16 10% 4 12% 5 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 22% 5 35% 8 17% 4 9% 2 17% 4 100% 23 Total 36% 438 47% 580 12% 147 3% 42 2% 22 100% 1229 Q25 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 9% 86 27% 254 38% 363 23% 215 3% 25 100% 943 Black 17% 24 26% 36 34% 47 20% 28 4% 5 100% 140 Hisp 12% 9 33% 25 35% 26 17% 13 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 17% 7 29% 12 34% 14 15% 6 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 26% 6 30% 7 13% 3 17% 4 100% 23 Total 11% 130 27% 336 37% 458 22% 267 3% 38 100% 1229 Q25 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 9% 86 27% 254 38% 363 23% 215 3% 25 100% 943 Black 17% 24 26% 36 34% 47 20% 28 4% 5 100% 140 Hisp 12% 9 33% 25 35% 26 17% 13 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 17% 7 29% 12 34% 14 15% 6 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 43% 3 14% 1 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 26% 6 30% 7 13% 3 17% 4 100% 23 Total 11% 130 27% 336 37% 458 22% 267 3% 38 100% 1229 Q26 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 6% 60 13% 126 41% 388 36% 336 3% 33 100% 943 Black 12% 17 14% 19 40% 56 29% 41 5% 7 100% 140 Hisp 13% 10 11% 8 49% 37 21% 16 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 5% 2 20% 8 49% 20 20% 8 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 14% 1 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 17% 4 39% 9 22% 5 17% 4 100% 23 Total 7% 91 14% 166 42% 513 33% 408 4% 51 100% 1229 Q26 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 6% 60 13% 126 41% 388 36% 336 3% 33 100% 943 Black 12% 17 14% 19 40% 56 29% 41 5% 7 100% 140 Hisp 13% 10 11% 8 49% 37 21% 16 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 5% 2 20% 8 49% 20 20% 8 7% 3 100% 41 Ind 14% 1 14% 1 43% 3 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 17% 4 39% 9 22% 5 17% 4 100% 23 Total 7% 91 14% 166 42% 513 33% 408 4% 51 100% 1229 PAGE D-16 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-17 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q27 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 35 10% 95 41% 387 36% 341 9% 85 100% 943 Black 0% 0 4% 5 31% 44 51% 71 14% 20 100% 140 Hisp 4% 3 5% 4 36% 27 43% 32 12% 9 100% 75 Asian 0% 0 2% 1 34% 14 51% 21 12% 5 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 0% 0 14% 1 57% 4 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 9% 2 26% 6 26% 6 35% 8 100% 23 Total 3% 41 9% 107 39% 479 39% 475 10% 127 100% 1229 Q27 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 35 10% 95 41% 387 36% 341 9% 85 100% 943 Black 0% 0 4% 5 31% 44 51% 71 14% 20 100% 140 Hisp 4% 3 5% 4 36% 27 43% 32 12% 9 100% 75 Asian 0% 0 2% 1 34% 14 51% 21 12% 5 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 0% 0 14% 1 57% 4 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 9% 2 26% 6 26% 6 35% 8 100% 23 Total 3% 41 9% 107 39% 479 39% 475 10% 127 100% 1229 Q28 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 34 13% 119 42% 397 33% 314 8% 79 100% 943 Black 1% 1 1% 2 26% 37 61% 85 11% 15 100% 140 Hisp 3% 2 4% 3 27% 20 56% 42 11% 8 100% 75 Asian 0% 0 7% 3 34% 14 49% 20 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 0% 0 14% 1 57% 4 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 4% 1 26% 6 30% 7 35% 8 100% 23 Total 3% 40 10% 128 39% 475 38% 472 9% 114 100% 1229 Q28 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 4% 34 13% 119 42% 397 33% 314 8% 79 100% 943 Black 1% 1 1% 2 26% 37 61% 85 11% 15 100% 140 Hisp 3% 2 4% 3 27% 20 56% 42 11% 8 100% 75 Asian 0% 0 7% 3 34% 14 49% 20 10% 4 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 0% 0 14% 1 57% 4 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 4% 1 26% 6 30% 7 35% 8 100% 23 Total 3% 40 10% 128 39% 475 38% 472 9% 114 100% 1229 Q29 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 0% 4 1% 13 3% 26 2% 15 94% 885 100% 943 Black 0% 0 4% 5 6% 8 4% 6 86% 121 100% 140 Hisp 1% 1 3% 2 8% 6 12% 9 76% 57 100% 75 Asian 5% 2 5% 2 7% 3 5% 2 78% 32 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 100% 7 Other 0% 0 0% 0 9% 2 0% 0 91% 21 100% 23 Total 1% 7 2% 22 4% 45 3% 32 91% 1123 100% 1229 Q29 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total White 0% 4 1% 13 3% 26 2% 15 94% 885 100% 943 Black 0% 0 4% 5 6% 8 4% 6 86% 121 100% 140 Hisp 1% 1 3% 2 8% 6 12% 9 76% 57 100% 75 Asian 5% 2 5% 2 7% 3 5% 2 78% 32 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 100% 7 Other 0% 0 0% 0 9% 2 0% 0 91% 21 100% 23 Total 1% 7 2% 22 4% 45 3% 32 91% 1123 100% 1229 PAGE D-17 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-18 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q30 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Other Total White 24% 224 12% 113 22% 207 13% 123 13% 119 16% 148 1% 9 100% 943 Black 19% 26 10% 14 19% 26 9% 12 15% 21 28% 39 1% 2 100% 140 Hisp 11% 8 5% 4 17% 13 17% 13 19% 14 28% 21 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 15% 6 5% 2 29% 12 7% 3 17% 7 24% 10 2% 1 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 0% 0 29% 2 0% 0 43% 3 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 9% 2 17% 4 9% 2 13% 3 30% 7 17% 4 100% 23 Total 22% 267 11% 135 21% 264 12% 153 14% 167 18% 225 1% 18 100% 1229 Q30 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Other Total White 24% 224 12% 113 22% 207 13% 123 13% 119 16% 148 1% 9 100% 943 Black 19% 26 10% 14 19% 26 9% 12 15% 21 28% 39 1% 2 100% 140 Hisp 11% 8 5% 4 17% 13 17% 13 19% 14 28% 21 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 15% 6 5% 2 29% 12 7% 3 17% 7 24% 10 2% 1 100% 41 Ind 29% 2 0% 0 29% 2 0% 0 43% 3 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 Other 4% 1 9% 2 17% 4 9% 2 13% 3 30% 7 17% 4 100% 23 Total 22% 267 11% 135 21% 264 12% 153 14% 167 18% 225 1% 18 100% 1229 Q31 Yes No Other Total White 1% 6 6% 61 93% 876 100% 943 Black 4% 5 11% 16 85% 119 100% 140 Hisp 8% 6 17% 13 75% 56 100% 75 Asian 0% 0 27% 11 73% 30 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 100% 7 Other 0% 0 9% 2 91% 21 100% 23 Total 1% 17 8% 103 90% 1109 100% 1229 Q31 Yes No Other Total White 1% 6 6% 61 93% 876 100% 943 Black 4% 5 11% 16 85% 119 100% 140 Hisp 8% 6 17% 13 75% 56 100% 75 Asian 0% 0 27% 11 73% 30 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 0% 0 100% 7 100% 7 Other 0% 0 9% 2 91% 21 100% 23 Total 1% 17 8% 103 90% 1109 100% 1229 Q32 Yes No Other Total White 5% 48 93% 877 2% 18 100% 943 Black 4% 6 94% 131 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 3% 2 95% 71 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 12% 5 83% 34 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 100% 7 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 57% 13 30% 7 100% 23 Total 5% 64 92% 1133 3% 32 100% 1229 Q32 Yes No Other Total White 5% 48 93% 877 2% 18 100% 943 Black 4% 6 94% 131 2% 3 100% 140 Hisp 3% 2 95% 71 3% 2 100% 75 Asian 12% 5 83% 34 5% 2 100% 41 Ind 0% 0 100% 7 0% 0 100% 7 Other 13% 3 57% 13 30% 7 100% 23 Total 5% 64 92% 1133 3% 32 100% 1229 Q33 Yes No Other Total White 72% 683 10% 90 18% 170 100% 943 Black 70% 98 9% 12 21% 30 100% 140 Hisp 73% 55 5% 4 21% 16 100% 75 Asian 59% 24 15% 6 27% 11 100% 41 Ind 86% 6 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 52% 12 13% 3 35% 8 100% 23 Total 71% 878 9% 116 19% 235 100% 1229 Q33 Yes No Other Total White 72% 683 10% 90 18% 170 100% 943 Black 70% 98 9% 12 21% 30 100% 140 Hisp 73% 55 5% 4 21% 16 100% 75 Asian 59% 24 15% 6 27% 11 100% 41 Ind 86% 6 14% 1 0% 0 100% 7 Other 52% 12 13% 3 35% 8 100% 23 Total 71% 878 9% 116 19% 235 100% 1229 PAGE D-18 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Q34 Yes No Other Total White 73% 690 23% 214 4% 39 100% 943 Black 81% 113 16% 22 4% 5 100% 140 KPMG CONSULTING Hisp 83% 62 12% 9 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 76% 31 22% 9 2% 1 100% 41 Ind 71% 5 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 JUNE 14 2002 Other 61% 14 17% 4 22% 5 100% 23 Total 74% 915 21% 260 4% 54 100% 1229 PAGE D-19 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Q34 Yes No Other Total White 73% 690 23% 214 4% 39 100% 943 Black 81% 113 16% 22 4% 5 100% 140 KPMG CONSULTING Hisp 83% 62 12% 9 5% 4 100% 75 Asian 76% 31 22% 9 2% 1 100% 41 Ind 71% 5 29% 2 0% 0 100% 7 JUNE 14 2002 Other 61% 14 17% 4 22% 5 100% 23 Total 74% 915 21% 260 4% 54 100% 1229 PAGE D-19 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING MAY 2002 PAGE D-20 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING MAY 2002 PAGE D-20 Responses by gender Responses by gender The following tables provide survey responses by gender The top-left cell provides the question number corresponding to the survey form In multi-part questions the question number is followed by the part number The left-hand column lists each response to the question and the top row lists gender groups “other” means that a response was indecipherable or blank The following tables provide survey responses by gender The top-left cell provides the question number corresponding to the survey form In multi-part questions the question number is followed by the part number The left-hand column lists each response to the question and the top row lists gender groups “other” means that a response was indecipherable or blank Q1-1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 2% 13 6% 38 6% 42 10% 68 21% 141 39% 257 16% 104 100% 663 Female 6% 33 11% 62 10% 55 17% 93 18% 102 26% 144 12% 69 100% 558 Other 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 2 Total 4% 47 8% 100 8% 97 13% 161 20% 244 33% 401 14% 173 100% 1223 Q1-1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 2% 13 6% 38 6% 42 10% 68 21% 141 39% 257 16% 104 100% 663 Female 6% 33 11% 62 10% 55 17% 93 18% 102 26% 144 12% 69 100% 558 Other 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 2 Total 4% 47 8% 100 8% 97 13% 161 20% 244 33% 401 14% 173 100% 1223 Q1-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 5% 30 9% 58 13% 83 22% 146 25% 164 21% 138 7% 45 100% 664 Female 11% 64 13% 70 14% 80 23% 129 19% 106 15% 82 5% 26 100% 557 Other 50% 1 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 2 Total 8% 95 10% 128 13% 164 22% 275 22% 270 18% 220 6% 71 100% 1223 Q1-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 5% 30 9% 58 13% 83 22% 146 25% 164 21% 138 7% 45 100% 664 Female 11% 64 13% 70 14% 80 23% 129 19% 106 15% 82 5% 26 100% 557 Other 50% 1 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 2 Total 8% 95 10% 128 13% 164 22% 275 22% 270 18% 220 6% 71 100% 1223 Q1-3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 3% 22 7% 45 9% 58 13% 86 19% 128 38% 248 11% 74 100% 661 Female 8% 42 8% 43 10% 56 18% 102 21% 114 26% 146 9% 52 100% 555 Other 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 100% 2 Total 5% 65 7% 88 9% 114 15% 188 20% 242 32% 394 10% 127 100% 1218 Q1-3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 3% 22 7% 45 9% 58 13% 86 19% 128 38% 248 11% 74 100% 661 Female 8% 42 8% 43 10% 56 18% 102 21% 114 26% 146 9% 52 100% 555 Other 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 100% 2 Total 5% 65 7% 88 9% 114 15% 188 20% 242 32% 394 10% 127 100% 1218 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-21 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q1-4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 2% 12 6% 38 6% 39 17% 112 27% 180 34% 222 9% 59 100% 662 Female 4% 24 6% 31 8% 47 22% 123 22% 122 27% 148 11% 60 100% 555 Other 0% 0 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 1 Total 3% 36 6% 69 7% 87 19% 235 25% 302 30% 370 10% 119 100% 1218 Q1-4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 2% 12 6% 38 6% 39 17% 112 27% 180 34% 222 9% 59 100% 662 Female 4% 24 6% 31 8% 47 22% 123 22% 122 27% 148 11% 60 100% 555 Other 0% 0 0% 0 100% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 1 Total 3% 36 6% 69 7% 87 19% 235 25% 302 30% 370 10% 119 100% 1218 Q1-5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 3% 21 7% 47 8% 50 24% 159 25% 165 26% 171 6% 40 100% 653 Female 4% 22 10% 51 13% 69 21% 112 21% 110 22% 115 10% 51 100% 530 Other 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 100% 2 Total 4% 43 8% 98 10% 120 23% 271 23% 275 24% 287 8% 91 100% 1185 Q1-5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 3% 21 7% 47 8% 50 24% 159 25% 165 26% 171 6% 40 100% 653 Female 4% 22 10% 51 13% 69 21% 112 21% 110 22% 115 10% 51 100% 530 Other 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 100% 2 Total 4% 43 8% 98 10% 120 23% 271 23% 275 24% 287 8% 91 100% 1185 Q1-6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 3% 19 6% 37 9% 59 16% 104 22% 149 33% 218 12% 77 100% 663 Female 5% 30 10% 55 14% 75 17% 94 20% 110 25% 136 10% 55 100% 555 Other 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 100% 2 Total 4% 50 8% 92 11% 134 16% 198 21% 259 29% 355 11% 132 100% 1220 Q1-6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 3% 19 6% 37 9% 59 16% 104 22% 149 33% 218 12% 77 100% 663 Female 5% 30 10% 55 14% 75 17% 94 20% 110 25% 136 10% 55 100% 555 Other 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 100% 2 Total 4% 50 8% 92 11% 134 16% 198 21% 259 29% 355 11% 132 100% 1220 Q1-7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 4% 27 7% 44 11% 70 16% 104 25% 164 29% 192 9% 61 100% 662 Female 8% 44 12% 67 14% 76 17% 95 19% 107 22% 123 8% 44 100% 556 Other 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 2 Total 6% 72 9% 111 12% 146 16% 199 22% 272 26% 315 9% 105 100% 1220 Q1-7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Total Male 4% 27 7% 44 11% 70 16% 104 25% 164 29% 192 9% 61 100% 662 Female 8% 44 12% 67 14% 76 17% 95 19% 107 22% 123 8% 44 100% 556 Other 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 50% 1 0% 0 0% 0 100% 2 Total 6% 72 9% 111 12% 146 16% 199 22% 272 26% 315 9% 105 100% 1220 PAGE D-21 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-22 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q2-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 2% 12 8% 53 42% 279 47% 311 2% 10 100% 665 Female 6% 35 13% 71 47% 263 32% 181 1% 8 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 4% 47 10% 124 44% 542 40% 493 2% 23 100% 1229 Q2-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 2% 12 8% 53 42% 279 47% 311 2% 10 100% 665 Female 6% 35 13% 71 47% 263 32% 181 1% 8 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 4% 47 10% 124 44% 542 40% 493 2% 23 100% 1229 Q2-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 5% 33 12% 79 42% 281 36% 241 5% 31 100% 665 Female 9% 51 19% 105 43% 242 25% 139 4% 21 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 7% 84 15% 184 43% 523 31% 381 5% 57 100% 1229 Q2-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 5% 33 12% 79 42% 281 36% 241 5% 31 100% 665 Female 9% 51 19% 105 43% 242 25% 139 4% 21 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 7% 84 15% 184 43% 523 31% 381 5% 57 100% 1229 Q3-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 1% 7 7% 45 38% 254 52% 347 2% 12 100% 665 Female 12% 67 17% 96 41% 227 29% 162 1% 6 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 6% 74 11% 141 39% 481 41% 510 2% 23 100% 1229 Q3-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 1% 7 7% 45 38% 254 52% 347 2% 12 100% 665 Female 12% 67 17% 96 41% 227 29% 162 1% 6 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 6% 74 11% 141 39% 481 41% 510 2% 23 100% 1229 Q3-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 4% 25 11% 74 39% 262 43% 288 2% 16 100% 665 Female 10% 56 19% 104 39% 218 29% 162 3% 18 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 7% 81 14% 178 39% 480 37% 451 3% 39 100% 1229 Q3-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 4% 25 11% 74 39% 262 43% 288 2% 16 100% 665 Female 10% 56 19% 104 39% 218 29% 162 3% 18 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 7% 81 14% 178 39% 480 37% 451 3% 39 100% 1229 Q3-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 4% 25 8% 53 39% 259 45% 302 4% 26 100% 665 Female 4% 23 7% 37 38% 214 48% 268 3% 16 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 4% 48 7% 90 38% 473 46% 571 4% 47 100% 1229 Q3-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 4% 25 8% 53 39% 259 45% 302 4% 26 100% 665 Female 4% 23 7% 37 38% 214 48% 268 3% 16 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 4% 48 7% 90 38% 473 46% 571 4% 47 100% 1229 PAGE D-22 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-23 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q3-4 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 6% 43 21% 137 39% 260 25% 169 8% 56 100% 665 Female 11% 61 21% 117 36% 202 20% 110 12% 68 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 8% 104 21% 254 38% 463 23% 279 10% 129 100% 1229 Q3-4 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 6% 43 21% 137 39% 260 25% 169 8% 56 100% 665 Female 11% 61 21% 117 36% 202 20% 110 12% 68 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 8% 104 21% 254 38% 463 23% 279 10% 129 100% 1229 Q4-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 44% 294 45% 299 7% 45 2% 14 2% 13 100% 665 Female 39% 218 46% 257 10% 57 3% 16 2% 10 100% 558 Other 17% 1 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 42% 513 45% 557 8% 102 2% 30 2% 27 100% 1229 Q4-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 44% 294 45% 299 7% 45 2% 14 2% 13 100% 665 Female 39% 218 46% 257 10% 57 3% 16 2% 10 100% 558 Other 17% 1 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 42% 513 45% 557 8% 102 2% 30 2% 27 100% 1229 Q4-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 32% 214 46% 309 13% 86 4% 26 5% 30 100% 665 Female 28% 158 44% 248 19% 107 4% 25 4% 20 100% 558 Other 17% 1 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 30% 373 45% 558 16% 193 4% 51 4% 54 100% 1229 Q4-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 32% 214 46% 309 13% 86 4% 26 5% 30 100% 665 Female 28% 158 44% 248 19% 107 4% 25 4% 20 100% 558 Other 17% 1 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 30% 373 45% 558 16% 193 4% 51 4% 54 100% 1229 Q4-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 20% 136 47% 313 23% 155 7% 49 2% 12 100% 665 Female 13% 74 43% 239 31% 175 11% 63 1% 7 100% 558 Other 0% 0 33% 2 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 17% 210 45% 554 27% 330 9% 112 2% 23 100% 1229 Q4-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 20% 136 47% 313 23% 155 7% 49 2% 12 100% 665 Female 13% 74 43% 239 31% 175 11% 63 1% 7 100% 558 Other 0% 0 33% 2 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 17% 210 45% 554 27% 330 9% 112 2% 23 100% 1229 Q4-4 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 13% 85 50% 331 26% 171 5% 31 7% 47 100% 665 Female 12% 66 39% 219 31% 172 8% 45 10% 56 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 12% 152 45% 550 28% 343 6% 76 9% 108 100% 1229 Q4-4 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 13% 85 50% 331 26% 171 5% 31 7% 47 100% 665 Female 12% 66 39% 219 31% 172 8% 45 10% 56 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 12% 152 45% 550 28% 343 6% 76 9% 108 100% 1229 PAGE D-23 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-24 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q5 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 40% 263 39% 260 12% 83 7% 47 2% 12 100% 665 Female 33% 186 31% 175 21% 115 13% 75 1% 7 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 37% 450 35% 435 16% 198 10% 123 2% 23 100% 1229 Q5 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 40% 263 39% 260 12% 83 7% 47 2% 12 100% 665 Female 33% 186 31% 175 21% 115 13% 75 1% 7 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 37% 450 35% 435 16% 198 10% 123 2% 23 100% 1229 Q6 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 53% 353 37% 249 5% 32 3% 17 2% 14 100% 665 Female 43% 239 39% 216 11% 63 4% 20 4% 20 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 48% 593 38% 465 8% 96 3% 37 3% 38 100% 1229 Q6 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 53% 353 37% 249 5% 32 3% 17 2% 14 100% 665 Female 43% 239 39% 216 11% 63 4% 20 4% 20 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 48% 593 38% 465 8% 96 3% 37 3% 38 100% 1229 Q7 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 24% 160 39% 258 16% 104 8% 52 14% 91 100% 665 Female 18% 99 31% 174 23% 129 15% 86 13% 70 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 21% 260 35% 432 19% 234 11% 138 13% 165 100% 1229 Q7 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 24% 160 39% 258 16% 104 8% 52 14% 91 100% 665 Female 18% 99 31% 174 23% 129 15% 86 13% 70 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 21% 260 35% 432 19% 234 11% 138 13% 165 100% 1229 Q8 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 46% 309 40% 263 8% 54 3% 20 3% 19 100% 665 Female 43% 240 40% 224 9% 50 5% 28 3% 16 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 45% 550 40% 487 9% 105 4% 48 3% 39 100% 1229 Q8 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 46% 309 40% 263 8% 54 3% 20 3% 19 100% 665 Female 43% 240 40% 224 9% 50 5% 28 3% 16 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 45% 550 40% 487 9% 105 4% 48 3% 39 100% 1229 Q10 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 26% 171 53% 352 15% 103 2% 14 4% 25 100% 665 Female 23% 128 44% 248 25% 137 4% 23 4% 22 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 24% 300 49% 600 20% 240 3% 37 4% 52 100% 1229 Q10 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 26% 171 53% 352 15% 103 2% 14 4% 25 100% 665 Female 23% 128 44% 248 25% 137 4% 23 4% 22 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 24% 300 49% 600 20% 240 3% 37 4% 52 100% 1229 PAGE D-24 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-25 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q11 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 37% 243 45% 297 14% 91 4% 27 1% 7 100% 665 Female 34% 187 40% 224 16% 91 9% 49 1% 7 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 35% 431 42% 521 15% 182 6% 77 1% 18 100% 1229 Q11 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 37% 243 45% 297 14% 91 4% 27 1% 7 100% 665 Female 34% 187 40% 224 16% 91 9% 49 1% 7 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 35% 431 42% 521 15% 182 6% 77 1% 18 100% 1229 Q12-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 37% 249 47% 310 8% 56 5% 31 3% 19 100% 665 Female 32% 179 43% 240 12% 68 9% 52 3% 19 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 35% 429 45% 550 10% 124 7% 84 3% 42 100% 1229 Q12-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 37% 249 47% 310 8% 56 5% 31 3% 19 100% 665 Female 32% 179 43% 240 12% 68 9% 52 3% 19 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 35% 429 45% 550 10% 124 7% 84 3% 42 100% 1229 Q12-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 9% 58 21% 137 34% 225 34% 225 3% 20 100% 665 Female 9% 51 16% 89 29% 161 42% 235 4% 22 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 9% 109 18% 227 31% 386 37% 460 4% 47 100% 1229 Q12-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 9% 58 21% 137 34% 225 34% 225 3% 20 100% 665 Female 9% 51 16% 89 29% 161 42% 235 4% 22 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 9% 109 18% 227 31% 386 37% 460 4% 47 100% 1229 Q13 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 35% 233 55% 368 8% 52 2% 10 0% 2 100% 665 Female 30% 166 53% 296 13% 73 3% 17 1% 6 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 33% 400 54% 664 10% 125 2% 27 1% 13 100% 1229 Q13 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 35% 233 55% 368 8% 52 2% 10 0% 2 100% 665 Female 30% 166 53% 296 13% 73 3% 17 1% 6 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 33% 400 54% 664 10% 125 2% 27 1% 13 100% 1229 Q14-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 37% 247 46% 303 11% 70 4% 28 3% 17 100% 665 Female 30% 169 40% 221 18% 99 10% 57 2% 12 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 34% 417 43% 524 14% 169 7% 86 3% 33 100% 1229 Q14-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 37% 247 46% 303 11% 70 4% 28 3% 17 100% 665 Female 30% 169 40% 221 18% 99 10% 57 2% 12 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 34% 417 43% 524 14% 169 7% 86 3% 33 100% 1229 PAGE D-25 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-26 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q14-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 46% 309 38% 254 5% 35 4% 24 6% 43 100% 665 Female 39% 216 34% 192 10% 54 9% 50 8% 46 100% 558 Other 17% 1 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 43% 526 36% 447 7% 89 6% 74 8% 93 100% 1229 Q14-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 46% 309 38% 254 5% 35 4% 24 6% 43 100% 665 Female 39% 216 34% 192 10% 54 9% 50 8% 46 100% 558 Other 17% 1 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 43% 526 36% 447 7% 89 6% 74 8% 93 100% 1229 Q15 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 19% 129 44% 290 13% 88 6% 37 18% 121 100% 665 Female 16% 91 38% 212 20% 109 12% 65 15% 81 100% 558 Other 0% 0 33% 2 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 18% 220 41% 504 16% 197 8% 102 17% 206 100% 1229 Q15 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 19% 129 44% 290 13% 88 6% 37 18% 121 100% 665 Female 16% 91 38% 212 20% 109 12% 65 15% 81 100% 558 Other 0% 0 33% 2 0% 0 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 18% 220 41% 504 16% 197 8% 102 17% 206 100% 1229 Q16 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 25% 169 50% 330 17% 112 6% 38 2% 16 100% 665 Female 24% 132 39% 218 22% 122 11% 63 4% 23 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 17% 1 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 24% 301 45% 549 19% 235 8% 101 3% 43 100% 1229 Q16 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 25% 169 50% 330 17% 112 6% 38 2% 16 100% 665 Female 24% 132 39% 218 22% 122 11% 63 4% 23 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 17% 1 0% 0 67% 4 100% 6 Total 24% 301 45% 549 19% 235 8% 101 3% 43 100% 1229 Q17 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 29% 196 48% 316 14% 96 5% 35 3% 22 100% 665 Female 23% 129 40% 224 20% 112 13% 70 4% 23 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 26% 325 44% 541 17% 208 9% 106 4% 49 100% 1229 Q17 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 29% 196 48% 316 14% 96 5% 35 3% 22 100% 665 Female 23% 129 40% 224 20% 112 13% 70 4% 23 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 26% 325 44% 541 17% 208 9% 106 4% 49 100% 1229 Q18-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 18% 118 30% 199 25% 164 9% 61 18% 123 100% 665 Female 20% 111 25% 137 24% 132 16% 89 16% 89 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 19% 229 27% 336 24% 297 12% 150 18% 217 100% 1229 Q18-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 18% 118 30% 199 25% 164 9% 61 18% 123 100% 665 Female 20% 111 25% 137 24% 132 16% 89 16% 89 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 19% 229 27% 336 24% 297 12% 150 18% 217 100% 1229 PAGE D-26 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-27 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q18-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 16% 107 24% 162 18% 119 10% 64 32% 213 100% 665 Female 18% 100 19% 106 19% 104 14% 80 30% 168 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 17% 207 22% 269 18% 223 12% 145 31% 385 100% 1229 Q18-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 16% 107 24% 162 18% 119 10% 64 32% 213 100% 665 Female 18% 100 19% 106 19% 104 14% 80 30% 168 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 17% 207 22% 269 18% 223 12% 145 31% 385 100% 1229 Q18-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 15% 100 31% 207 15% 102 9% 59 30% 197 100% 665 Female 22% 124 26% 145 19% 108 14% 79 18% 102 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 18% 224 29% 352 17% 210 11% 139 25% 304 100% 1229 Q18-3 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 15% 100 31% 207 15% 102 9% 59 30% 197 100% 665 Female 22% 124 26% 145 19% 108 14% 79 18% 102 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 18% 224 29% 352 17% 210 11% 139 25% 304 100% 1229 Q19-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 6% 42 10% 69 30% 199 45% 298 9% 57 100% 665 Female 14% 77 17% 96 30% 167 29% 164 10% 54 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 10% 119 13% 165 30% 366 38% 463 9% 116 100% 1229 Q19-1 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 6% 42 10% 69 30% 199 45% 298 9% 57 100% 665 Female 14% 77 17% 96 30% 167 29% 164 10% 54 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 10% 119 13% 165 30% 366 38% 463 9% 116 100% 1229 Q19-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 5% 34 10% 66 30% 199 45% 299 10% 67 100% 665 Female 11% 59 14% 76 32% 176 30% 168 14% 79 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 8% 93 12% 142 31% 375 38% 468 12% 151 100% 1229 Q19-2 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 5% 34 10% 66 30% 199 45% 299 10% 67 100% 665 Female 11% 59 14% 76 32% 176 30% 168 14% 79 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 8% 93 12% 142 31% 375 38% 468 12% 151 100% 1229 Q20 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 11% 73 44% 291 16% 105 7% 46 23% 150 100% 665 Female 9% 51 32% 181 25% 140 16% 90 17% 96 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 10% 124 38% 473 20% 245 11% 136 20% 251 100% 1229 Q20 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 11% 73 44% 291 16% 105 7% 46 23% 150 100% 665 Female 9% 51 32% 181 25% 140 16% 90 17% 96 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 10% 124 38% 473 20% 245 11% 136 20% 251 100% 1229 PAGE D-27 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-28 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q21 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 5% 32 7% 49 43% 286 33% 218 12% 80 100% 665 Female 8% 44 20% 111 30% 165 22% 124 20% 114 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 6% 76 13% 160 37% 452 28% 342 16% 199 100% 1229 Q21 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 5% 32 7% 49 43% 286 33% 218 12% 80 100% 665 Female 8% 44 20% 111 30% 165 22% 124 20% 114 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 6% 76 13% 160 37% 452 28% 342 16% 199 100% 1229 Q22 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 9% 62 11% 70 4% 26 1% 9 75% 498 100% 665 Female 6% 35 11% 64 6% 36 5% 28 71% 395 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 6 100% 6 Total 8% 97 11% 134 5% 62 3% 37 73% 899 100% 1229 Q22 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 9% 62 11% 70 4% 26 1% 9 75% 498 100% 665 Female 6% 35 11% 64 6% 36 5% 28 71% 395 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 6 100% 6 Total 8% 97 11% 134 5% 62 3% 37 73% 899 100% 1229 Q23 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 39% 261 44% 292 8% 52 3% 22 6% 38 100% 665 Female 35% 194 42% 236 10% 58 4% 22 9% 48 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 37% 456 43% 528 9% 110 4% 45 7% 90 100% 1229 Q23 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 39% 261 44% 292 8% 52 3% 22 6% 38 100% 665 Female 35% 194 42% 236 10% 58 4% 22 9% 48 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 37% 456 43% 528 9% 110 4% 45 7% 90 100% 1229 Q24 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 39% 260 48% 318 9% 59 3% 19 1% 9 100% 665 Female 32% 177 47% 262 16% 88 4% 22 2% 9 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 36% 438 47% 580 12% 147 3% 42 2% 22 100% 1229 Q24 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 39% 260 48% 318 9% 59 3% 19 1% 9 100% 665 Female 32% 177 47% 262 16% 88 4% 22 2% 9 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 36% 438 47% 580 12% 147 3% 42 2% 22 100% 1229 Q25 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 8% 56 25% 169 40% 263 23% 156 3% 21 100% 665 Female 13% 74 30% 167 35% 194 20% 110 2% 13 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 11% 130 27% 336 37% 458 22% 267 3% 38 100% 1229 Q25 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 8% 56 25% 169 40% 263 23% 156 3% 21 100% 665 Female 13% 74 30% 167 35% 194 20% 110 2% 13 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 11% 130 27% 336 37% 458 22% 267 3% 38 100% 1229 PAGE D-28 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-29 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q26 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 6% 41 11% 73 44% 290 36% 239 3% 22 100% 665 Female 9% 50 17% 93 40% 223 30% 167 4% 25 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 33% 2 67% 4 100% 6 Total 7% 91 14% 166 42% 513 33% 408 4% 51 100% 1229 Q26 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 6% 41 11% 73 44% 290 36% 239 3% 22 100% 665 Female 9% 50 17% 93 40% 223 30% 167 4% 25 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 33% 2 67% 4 100% 6 Total 7% 91 14% 166 42% 513 33% 408 4% 51 100% 1229 Q27 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 5% 33 13% 88 42% 277 32% 211 8% 56 100% 665 Female 1% 8 3% 19 36% 202 47% 263 12% 66 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 3% 41 9% 107 39% 479 39% 475 10% 127 100% 1229 Q27 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 5% 33 13% 88 42% 277 32% 211 8% 56 100% 665 Female 1% 8 3% 19 36% 202 47% 263 12% 66 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 3% 41 9% 107 39% 479 39% 475 10% 127 100% 1229 Q28 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 4% 27 12% 83 43% 285 33% 218 8% 52 100% 665 Female 2% 13 8% 45 34% 190 45% 253 10% 57 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 3% 40 10% 128 39% 475 38% 472 9% 114 100% 1229 Q28 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 4% 27 12% 83 43% 285 33% 218 8% 52 100% 665 Female 2% 13 8% 45 34% 190 45% 253 10% 57 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 3% 40 10% 128 39% 475 38% 472 9% 114 100% 1229 Q29 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 0% 3 1% 8 2% 14 2% 15 94% 625 100% 665 Female 1% 4 3% 14 6% 31 3% 17 88% 492 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 6 100% 6 Total 1% 7 2% 22 4% 45 3% 32 91% 1123 100% 1229 Q29 Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Other Total Male 0% 3 1% 8 2% 14 2% 15 94% 625 100% 665 Female 1% 4 3% 14 6% 31 3% 17 88% 492 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 100% 6 100% 6 Total 1% 7 2% 22 4% 45 3% 32 91% 1123 100% 1229 Q30 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Other Total Male 24% 160 12% 79 23% 154 11% 75 13% 87 16% 105 1% 5 100% 665 Female 19% 107 10% 56 20% 109 14% 78 14% 80 21% 119 2% 9 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 22% 267 11% 135 21% 264 12% 153 14% 167 18% 225 1% 18 100% 1229 Q30 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Other Total Male 24% 160 12% 79 23% 154 11% 75 13% 87 16% 105 1% 5 100% 665 Female 19% 107 10% 56 20% 109 14% 78 14% 80 21% 119 2% 9 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 0% 0 0% 0 17% 1 67% 4 100% 6 Total 22% 267 11% 135 21% 264 12% 153 14% 167 18% 225 1% 18 100% 1229 PAGE D-29 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-30 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 Q31 Yes No Other Total Male 1% 8 6% 37 93% 620 100% 665 Female 2% 9 12% 66 87% 483 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 100% 6 100% 6 Total 1% 17 8% 103 90% 1109 100% 1229 Q31 Yes No Other Total Male 1% 8 6% 37 93% 620 100% 665 Female 2% 9 12% 66 87% 483 100% 558 Other 0% 0 0% 0 100% 6 100% 6 Total 1% 17 8% 103 90% 1109 100% 1229 Q32 Yes No Other Total Male 2% 16 95% 633 2% 16 100% 665 Female 9% 48 89% 499 2% 11 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 5% 64 92% 1133 3% 32 100% 1229 Q32 Yes No Other Total Male 2% 16 95% 633 2% 16 100% 665 Female 9% 48 89% 499 2% 11 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 5% 64 92% 1133 3% 32 100% 1229 Q33 Yes No Other Total Male 75% 500 6% 40 19% 125 100% 665 Female 68% 378 13% 75 19% 105 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 71% 878 9% 116 19% 235 100% 1229 Q33 Yes No Other Total Male 75% 500 6% 40 19% 125 100% 665 Female 68% 378 13% 75 19% 105 100% 558 Other 0% 0 17% 1 83% 5 100% 6 Total 71% 878 9% 116 19% 235 100% 1229 Q34 Yes No Other Total Male 79% 528 17% 111 4% 26 100% 665 Female 69% 386 27% 149 4% 23 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 74% 915 21% 260 4% 54 100% 1229 Q34 Yes No Other Total Male 79% 528 17% 111 4% 26 100% 665 Female 69% 386 27% 149 4% 23 100% 558 Other 17% 1 0% 0 83% 5 100% 6 Total 74% 915 21% 260 4% 54 100% 1229 Responses by to demographic questions Responses by to demographic questions The following tables provide counts of responses to the demographic questions The following tables provide counts of responses to the demographic questions Race White Black Hispanic Asian Indian Nat Am Other Total Count 77% 943 11% 140 6% 75 3% 41 1% 7 2% 23 100% 1229 Race White Black Hispanic Asian Indian Nat Am Other Total Count 77% 943 11% 140 6% 75 3% 41 1% 7 2% 23 100% 1229 PAGE D-30 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Gender Male Female Other Total Count 54% 665 45% 558 0% 6 100% 1229 KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-31 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Gender Male Female Other Total Count 54% 665 45% 558 0% 6 100% 1229 Job classification Non-supervisory attorney Supervisory attorney Other Total Count 63% 777 34% 413 5% 62 100% 1229 Job classification Non-supervisory attorney Supervisory attorney Other Total Count 63% 777 34% 413 5% 62 100% 1229 Grade GS-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14 GS-15 GM-13 GM-14 GM-15 AD-20 AD-21 AD-24 AD-25 AD-26 AD-27 AD-28 AD-29 AD-10 thru AD-19 AD-0 thru AD-9 ES EX Other Total Count 1% 16 2% 24 3% 37 12% 147 36% 447 1% 7 1% 14 4% 48 0% 3 1% 12 1% 11 1% 16 1% 16 1% 14 1% 10 11% 137 2% 22 4% 55 4% 47 1% 16 11% 130 100% 1229 Grade GS-11 GS-12 GS-13 GS-14 GS-15 GM-13 GM-14 GM-15 AD-20 AD-21 AD-24 AD-25 AD-26 AD-27 AD-28 AD-29 AD-10 thru AD-19 AD-0 thru AD-9 ES EX Other Total Count 1% 16 2% 24 3% 37 12% 147 36% 447 1% 7 1% 14 4% 48 0% 3 1% 12 1% 11 1% 16 1% 16 1% 14 1% 10 11% 137 2% 22 4% 55 4% 47 1% 16 11% 130 100% 1229 KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-31 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Component ATR CIV CRT CRM ENR TAX BOP EOIR INS USA UST Other Total Count 2% 51 5% 113 4% 96 1% 22 4% 110 4% 104 1% 28 1% 16 3% 77 17% 434 6% 144 1% 34 100% 1229 KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-32 ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY IN THE ATTORNEY WORKFORCE Component ATR CIV CRT CRM ENR TAX BOP EOIR INS USA UST Other Total Count 2% 51 5% 113 4% 96 1% 22 4% 110 4% 104 1% 28 1% 16 3% 77 17% 434 6% 144 1% 34 100% 1229 KPMG CONSULTING JUNE 14 2002 PAGE D-32