Issue 34, Fall 2012

I am pleased to announce that my updated, revised and expanded Second Edition of Lawyers’ Professional Development: The Legal Employer’s Comprehensive Guide, is complete and will be published by NALP this month. The book covers the content of the first edition, contains a great deal of new material and expands some of the topics from the original text that now warrant greater prominence, such as competency models, technology-based training, and client-law firm collaboration in professional development. In my next newsletter I will give you more details about the book,  but you can pre-order now online at

This issue of Management Solutions offers an excerpt from the book on “Coaching, Mentoring and Sponsorship.” It distinguishes what each offers and explains their different benefits and uses. A related piece looks at the allure and challenges of sponsorship programs in law firm.

In addition, this issue discusses the dilemma of authenticity for women leaders. It explains how conflicting expectations force women to struggle with authenticity and suggests what they can do to develop authentic and effective leadership styles.

I also list several articles that I wrote or in which I was featured, and several upcoming events, webcasts and podcasts.

Over the next few weeks I will be traveling to New York, Minneapolis, South Florida and Washington, DC. If you have offices in those places, please contact me and let me know if I can be of help to you while I’m there.

In This Issue

Coaching, Mentoring and Sponsorship

The following is excerpted from Ida O. Abbott, Lawyers’ Professional Development: The Legal Employer’s Comprehensive Guide, 2nd Edition (NALP) (To be published fall, 2012)

Considerable confusion exists about coaching, mentoring and sponsorship. Many people refer to coaching and mentoring interchangeably. While both processes provide personalized professional development, require special interpersonal skills and have a significant impact on a lawyer’s career, there are some important distinctions between them. Coaching is also distinct from sponsorship, which is an advanced form of mentoring. Let’s examine these processes and clarify their similarities and differences.


Coaching deals with performance. It is functional and results-oriented. Coaching helps someone become more productive and effective at a specific set of functions, tasks or practices. A coach helps you identify and set goals in a particular area (or function) and develop a plan to achieve those goals. Then the coach gives you support while you implement your plan and achieve your desired results. Because you check in with the coach as your plan moves forward, the coach also keeps you disciplined and focused. 

Lawyers who receive coaching usually fall into one of three categories: new or existing leaders who want to optimize their leadership effectiveness; high potential lawyers who want to achieve their highest level of performance; and under-performing lawyers who must improve their performance or change certain behaviors in order to stay in the firm and on track. A large and growing number of coaches today help partners and some high potential associates with areas like business development, leadership development and leadership optimization. Firms also hire specialists to provide coaching in areas like communication and presentation skills, writing, time and work management and team management. Many firms also provide transition coaches for lawyers returning to work after taking leave for the birth or adoption of a child.

A few firms have coaches on staff but most firms hire outside coaches to work with particular lawyers on an as-needed basis. These coaches are paid specifically to provide coaching services. Mentors, sponsors and supervisors might all act as coaches when they help someone improve performance or set career goals, but if the issue involves adopting new behaviors or changing problematic behaviors, law firms and individual lawyers usually hire outside coaches.

Coaches can help lawyers recognize barriers to top performance and develop strategies for overcoming them, or identify counterproductive behaviors and develop techniques for changing them. While coaches hired as skills experts (e.g., in presentations or writing) use their expertise to offer advice and guide a lawyer’s skill development, most coaches act more indirectly. They help individuals look inside themselves to find solutions and achieve desired results. They are trained to use powerful questions that help individuals discover their strengths and deploy them to achieve their career goals. Some coaches are certified to administer psychometric assessments, helping lawyers increase their self-awareness. They might conduct interviews with co-workers, or study the lawyer’s performance evaluations, to collect feedback for the lawyer. Then they help the lawyer process this internal and external information and use it to enhance performance.


Mentoring is broader in scope and purpose than coaching, and is based on a deeper, more meaningful relationship than coaching. It is relational in nature and career-oriented. Both the quality of the mentoring relationship and the factors that determine quality – trust, mutual respect, and mutual learning – are critical to the mentoring process. Mentoring covers more wide-ranging career issues than coaching because it deals with mentees’ overall professional development and advancement, not simply performance goals. Although mentor and mentee might spend time on improving performance, the relationship usually expands to larger and longer-term personal and professional career issues. Mentors often employ coaching as one of their tools, along with confidence building, role modeling, counseling and advocacy. 

Within a law firm, mentors are predominantly lawyers with greater career experience and expertise than mentees. They act as mentors both informally in the usual course of work and through formal mentoring programs that have particular objectives and guidelines. They are not paid to be mentors; it is expected of them as part of their responsibility to the firm and its lawyers. However, given the time constraints and billing pressures in law firms today, many mentors lack the time to devote to mentoring and do not make it a priority. Consequently, firms are filling in gaps by hiring coaches to help with certain performance aspects of development, leadership and rainmaking. Coaching that targets specific areas where performance can be improved or optimized may be narrower in scope yet more effective than inadequate mentoring.

Mentoring is especially important, however, for career advancement. Unlike coaching, mentoring has a role in knowledge transfer and skill development. (Skill-focused coaching is an exception, as noted above). While coaches do not need to be lawyers, mentors within a firm usually are. They therefore play an important and direct role in helping lawyers become better, more highly skilled legal practitioners. Because they have relevant work and career experience, mentors are more likely than coaches to use their own experiences, insights and advice to help the mentee learn and progress. Coaches can help lawyers create a plan that calls for developing certain skills and getting certain work experience, but mentors can teach and model the specified legal skills and create the work opportunities needed to achieve those goals.

Another reason mentors are so valuable is that because they are lawyers in the same law firm, they know about the firm’s decision-making processes and political dynamics. They can give mentees inside information about firm management and politics that enable associates and junior partners to develop and execute smart career advancement strategies. They can offer insights into client relationships and make introductions to business contacts. Mentors can welcome lawyers into firm networks, make them feel appreciated, and promote a sense of inclusion and camaraderie that heighten engagement and personal identification with the firm. Most significantly, mentors are part of the firm. They can transmit firm values, culture and professionalism to young lawyers and future leaders.

In sum, mentoring and coaching are both important for professional development. Coaches can be very helpful in mapping out performance goals and supporting lawyers as they execute plans and strategies. At a time when accelerating development is of paramount importance, coaching is a useful resource for improving effectiveness and productivity. But for purposes of learning, engagement and career advancement, coaches cannot replace the importance and value of mentoring by an established lawyer in the firm who takes an active and personal interest in helping a younger lawyer succeed.


A sponsor is a strong advocate who has power and influence and uses that advocacy to produce positive career results for you. Sponsors publicly endorse your qualifications and take risks on your behalf, arguing that you should move up to a higher compensation tier or urging their partners that you are ready for equity partnership or a significant leadership position. They alert you to opportunities and appoint you to key posts. Sometimes they call in favors, put pressure on colleagues, or put their reputation and credibility on the line for you. Partners become sponsors when they perceive special value in you and actively help you advance. It can occur for any number of reasons: they might see you as a natural successor, as having rainmaking potential that could benefit them, or as having expertise necessary to support their clients. Sponsors and champions may not guarantee success, but they make it easier and improve your odds of receiving a coveted leadership appointment, a fatter paycheck or a new client.

When we talk about sponsorship today, it is basically mentoring at the highest level. Sponsorship is the same as the traditional concept of mentorship: a prominent and wise individual takes you under his wing, supports and protects you, and promotes your career success. Current conversations about sponsorship call attention to these traditional notions of how powerful people can help others succeed in a law firm (or any organization). They also direct attention to a critical factor in sponsorship: the sponsor must be someone with power who purposefully champions the other lawyer’s career.

The importance of sponsorship was underscored in a 2010 publication that found men enjoy greater career benefits from mentoring than women do.[1] The research data showed that women are promoted less often than men because mentors actively sponsor men for promotions far more often than they sponsor women. Both women and men get career advice from mentors, but advice consists of words and good intentions. Sponsorship involves taking action on another’s behalf to advance their career interests, and having sufficient clout to produce results. Because mentors do not sponsor women, women do not receive the same career benefits from mentoring that men do. In response, some law firms are starting initiatives to increase sponsorship for women and diverse lawyers. These programs generally target a group of mid- to senior associates or junior partners who are paired with one or two influential partners. Relationships tend to focus on creating high quality work and business development opportunities for the junior person. Most sponsorship programs are in the pilot stage, but early experience shows the need for very careful pairings and oversight. Although similar to other mentoring programs, sponsorship demands more of mentors, requires more focused effort from those being sponsored, and considerable ongoing involvement by program coordinators.


[1] Herminia Ibarra, Nancy M. Carver and Christine Silva, “Why Men Still Get More Promotions Than Women,” Harvard Business Review, September 2010; Nancy M. Carter, Ph.D., Christine Silva, “Mentoring: Necessary But Insufficient for Advancement,” Catalyst, 2010

The Allure and Challenges of Sponsorship Programs for Women

Law firm sponsorship programs are becoming a hot item. It has long been known that having a sponsor is critical for career advancement, but recently published research has found that women receive less sponsorship than men do. (Herminia Ibarra, Nancy M. Carver and Christine Silva, “Why Men Still Get More Promotions Than Women,” Harvard Business Review, September 2010; Nancy M. Carter, Ph.D., Christine Silva, “Mentoring: Necessary But Insufficient for Advancement,” Catalyst, 2010) As a result, their careers and compensation lag behind those of men. Firms that are concerned about retaining and advancing women are trying to make sponsorship more available to them. Toward that end, some firms are instituting sponsorship programs that pair up women (and in some firms, minority lawyers) with influential partners who agree to serve as their sponsors. Most of these programs are in the early stages, so it is premature to measure their impact. What is clear, however, is that these programs face considerable obstacles and must therefore be very carefully planned and managed.

The special nature of sponsorship

Sponsorship is a highly beneficial form of mentoring. While mentors perform a wide variety of functions, sponsorship is a strategic relationship that requires more active involvement and greater risk than ordinary mentoring. Sponsors personally invest in a lawyer’s success; they may consider her a protégée in the old fashioned sense of the word. They praise her to partners and clients, back her for high visibility work assignments, include her in business development events, direct business to her, invite her into powerful networks, see that she gets credit and better pay, and generally use their political influence and social capital to help her succeed. This is risky business. People with power wield it carefully. They will go out on a limb to champion someone only if they trust that person to excel in and make the most of the opportunities presented. Turning a client over to someone or supporting someone for an important committee leadership position means putting one’s own practice and credibility on the line. There can be serious repercussions if the person you sponsor fails to perform.

Because sponsorship is more of a high-stakes relationship than mentoring, its importance becomes more pronounced for senior associates and junior partners. Powerful partners will have little interest in sponsoring anyone who is not considered a top performer with a highly promising future. Senior associates have a track record that can be judged and they have earned a reputation as a star or an average performer. Junior partners have proven themselves by making it into the partnership. But even in those cases, a potential sponsor must believe that their investment will pay off.

Another important distinction between “basic” mentoring and sponsorship is that mentors just need more knowledge and experience than the mentee, while sponsors necessarily have power to make good things happen for the protégée. Sponsors are decision-makers or have access to those who make key decisions about work assignments, client relationships, leadership roles, compensation, and career-enhancing opportunities. Most mentors can be helpful whether or not they have any exceptional influence in the firm or community. But for sponsors to make a significant difference in someone’s career success they must have enough clout and connections to get her appointed or promoted, ensure she gets sufficient credit and compensation, or produce other kinds of positive career outcomes.

Sponsorship programs

Sponsorship programs in law firms tend to be similar to mentoring programs but with some important distinctions. They target a limited number of experienced women (and sometimes minority lawyers) who are top performers, and they specifically emphasize career advancement activities rather than educational, supportive or advisory aspects of mentoring. Sponsorship activities include creating challenging, high visibility opportunities for senior associates and/or junior partners in areas like work assignments, leadership posts, client relationships and business development.

Sponsorship programs in law firms are difficult to sustain. Some of the reasons include:

  • Law firm partners are not rewarded or held accountable for talent development, retention or advancement. Without incentives or penalties, programs have to rely on assigned sponsors’ good will and personal follow-through. Some sponsors will carry out their responsibilities, but many will not.
  • It is hard to “assign” partners to serve as sponsors. Sponsorship in law firms occurs naturally but selectively, as partners find junior lawyers they respect, trust and rely on, or want to help succeed for specific personal or client-related reasons. Because of the special nature of this relationship, an assigned sponsor must be eager – not just willing - to accept the responsibility.
  • Law firms are uncomfortable labeling lawyers or treating associates differently. Firms hire only lawyers who are considered “high potential.” Over time, it becomes clear that some have greater ability and potential than others. But even firms that move to merit-based systems avoid openly differentiating among associates this way. Sponsorship programs necessarily require selectivity.
  • Sponsorship programs cannot flourish in a competitive, eat-what-you-kill culture. They cannot succeed where partners are reluctant to champion anyone whose success might encroach on their own power, compensation or client relationships. Sponsorship requires a collaborative culture that views the success of every lawyer as a benefit for the entire firm.

In spite of such challenges, sponsorship programs can succeed in law firms if they are well planned and managed. Law firms that are considering such programs should keep the following points in mind:

  • Have a well-defined purpose and program objectives. Set specific goals and explain how the sponsorship program will help you achieve them. The clearer and more specific you can be, the better.
  • Focus on power and purpose, not on gender. In matching women with sponsors, what counts is what a woman’s career goals are and which partner is in the best position and has enough influence in the right places to provide the most opportunities and support.
  • Have men take the lead. Most sponsors in your program will be men, since they represent the vast majority of partners who fit the model of a sponsor. Men, beginning with the top firm leadership, must therefore give the program strong, genuine and visible support.
  • Build on pre-existing relationships. Relationships will have a greater chance of success if the sponsor knows the person with whom they are matched and believes in her talent, ability and ambition. The more work and client matters the two have in common, the better. And the more familiar the sponsor is with the protégée’s experience, prospects and career goals, the easier it is for the sponsor to advocate on her behalf. 
  • Help sponsors face and fight unconscious bias. Most partners already sponsor one or more lawyers informally. Most of their protéges are men. Sponsorship programs should encourage male partners to expand their sponsorship to women and show them how to do it. Teach them about unconscious bias and how to prevent it from interfering with their sponsorship of women.
  • Make it voluntary. Sponsors must be enthusiastic about participating. The more they believe in the protégée, the more likely this will happen. Protégées must also participate willingly. Some may resist; they will be reluctant to be involved with programs that are perceived as remedial, reverse discrimination, or undermining meritocracy.
  • Focus on action. Sponsorship is more than talking or advising; it involves creating career opportunities. Protégées and sponsors should have very clear goals in their work together. If they intend to focus on expanding or deepening the protégée’s client relationships, they should identify which clients they will target and the specific steps each of them will take toward that goal.
  • Provide ongoing oversight. Like any kind of program that asks people to do more than they normally would, a sponsorship program will fail if participants are not reminded and supported as they go along.

Alternatives to sponsorship programs

Formal sponsorship programs are not the only way to make career champions available to women. Another approach is to expand partners’ consciousness of the importance of sponsorship for women and give them tools and incentives to sponsor women. Sponsorship can be integrated into leadership, diversity or women’s initiatives. These initiatives can arm women with the mindset, tools and opportunities to find their own sponsors, and they can take steps to ensure that partners buy into the business case for sponsoring women and actively include women in the networking, business development, and leadership activities that are markers of sponsorship. But in order for any approach to show positive results in terms of retention and career advancement of women, the firm – and especially the men who run it - must fully and heartily embrace those broader initiatives, not just in words but in action. 

Women Leaders and the Dilemma of Authenticity

Authenticity is crucial for all leaders, but for women it presents a particular dilemma. While it is no longer rare or surprising to see women leaders, the image and traits associated with leadership are masculine. The dominant model of a leader in our culture is a man. The model is softening slightly as we see more women in prominent leadership roles, but the masculine norm remains firmly entrenched in our minds and expectations. Women who act “like men” contradict their basic natures, but women who act “like women” violate our expectations for what a leader should be like. So what’s a woman to do? How can a woman be an authentic leader when the expectations for leadership create this conflict?

By recognizing and overcoming these contradictions, women can develop authentic styles that transcend notions of femininity and masculinity. After all, gender is not a reliable predictor of leadership skill or success. Good leaders use both “feminine” and “masculine” styles and the best leaders use a wide variety of styles and techniques. Moreover, as the world continues to change, a leadership model based on any gender-specific style will be inadequate. Instead, flexibility, adaptability and versatility will be the hallmarks of great leaders. In this regard, women have an advantage; to succeed in a masculine environment, they have already acquired those skills.

The Conflict for Women Leaders: Who am I supposed to be?  Who am I?

Gender-based leadership conflict creates difficulties for women in many ways. Women in leadership are feminine beings in masculine roles and in the legal profession, within a masculine environment. The attributes and behaviors that are deemed assets for male leaders are considered unnatural and unattractive in women.  A man who is assertive and takes control is admired; a woman who acts the same way is called a bitch. Extensive research has established that women are judged as either likeable or competent, but not both.[1] When they act in ways that appear feminine (e.g., collaborative, supportive) they may be liked but they are not respected as competent leaders. When their behavior is more masculine (e.g., autonomous, authoritative), they may be seen as competent but they are not liked. Even when women are rated higher than men in specific leadership competencies, they are rated lower in leadership potential.[2]

Women respond to this environment in many ways. Some women:

  • Use a masculine style. For example, they may become overbearing and autocratic to prove they can be tough.
  • Downplay their femininity. They are “all business” and conceal their “softer” side.
  • Avoid self-promotion because it seems too much like bragging, which is considered unfeminine.
  • Are restrained when negotiating on their own behalf, even though they are superb negotiators for their clients.
  • Resist networking because it seems too much like “using people” for your own ends. 
  • Avoid wielding power when they have it  - or fail to recognize the power they have.
  • Avoid situations where their leadership style might be visible (e.g., decision making, delegating work).

These responses may make women feel comfortable in a difficult work environment, but they can derail a promising career. Most of these responses are not just expedient; they are inauthentic. They do not necessarily reflect who a woman is naturally, but represent coping behaviors that are less risky and easier to use. But they also lead to lack of trust and credibility among colleagues.

Because women are not sure how they “should” behave as leaders, they become preoccupied about how they appear to others rather than concentrating on their own values and what they want to accomplish. Consequently they focus too much on meeting others’ expectations and on creating the “right” leadership image for others. This saps them of energy, creates constant frustration, and detracts from their purpose as leaders.

What is Authenticity?

Authenticity can be best understood as acting in accordance with your core values and sense of purpose. When you understand what is most important to you and what you want to accomplish, you can be more effective in accomplishing your own and collective goals. To be authentic, you must act consistently with your personal values, but to get results as a leader, you must adapt your style and approach to the situations and people at hand.

Most people think of authenticity as “being yourself,” but as shown above, this is not easy for women to do. (Many men also struggle with authenticity, but the path is narrower and more treacherous for women.) Moreover, authenticity is about more than simply being your “natural” self. Many people have natural propensities that may be counterproductive, either in general or in leadership roles. Someone who is naturally authoritarian or withdrawn may be an excellent lawyer but a terrible or ineffective leader.

Further, authentic does not mean unchanging. To the contrary, leadership must be dynamic and adaptable because situations a leader has to deal with are constantly shifting. This does not mean changing who you are, but rather becoming the best “you” you can be by using your interpersonal skills to adapt to new conditions as they arise. There are times to be competitive and times where accommodation will be a more effective strategy. You do not have to change your values or your character; you simply make purposeful choices about your behavior and select the approach that is most likely to succeed.

The best leaders use styles that match their objectives. Moreover, they have a broad repertoire of leadership styles from which to choose. When trying to generate ideas or get buy-in for a new initiative, a leader might use a participative approach that gathers input from many people in order to spark creativity and win support. But in a crisis or when time is short, a more directive approach can calm fears, get people to focus their attention on what has to be done, and spur them into action quickly. A leader who can handle both kinds of situations and achieve positive results is seen as both a consensus builder (rather than indecisive) and decisive (rather than autocratic). When you have many leadership styles you can put to good use, your impact as a leader will be far greater.

Building authenticity

The key to developing an authentic leadership identity is to find a spectrum of styles that feel right for you and help you get your work done. In order for a style to “feel right,” it needs to be consistent with your core values and further your ability to accomplish your work and career objectives. Your values are intensively personal; the things that drive people, their highest priorities, and what they believe in are different for every individual. So the first step in building an authentic leadership identity is to be clear about what your values are. Then you can make career and behavior choices that support those values. Being clear about your values also allows you to be creative in the choices you make. Your choices may take you out of your comfort zone and make you feel insecure. But they can still be authentic if they are in sync with the values you hold dear.

For example, you may dislike networking because it seems like using people, which conflicts with the value you place on respecting and helping others. But having a network of influential people is essential to your ability to be an effective leader. Rather than reject it altogether, you can develop your own approach to network building. One key is to recognize that relationships are mutual, i.e., you must give as well as get. When you have something to offer the other person, especially if you offer first, the relationship is more than treating the person as an instrument to an end. This is not “networking” as in “working a room.” It is network building as an investment in social capital - the relationships that enable you to achieve business objectives for yourself and the people you lead. It means being strategic: identifying specific contacts you need to meet in order to achieve your purpose (becoming a leader), establishing mutually beneficial relationships with them, and integrating relationship strengthening activities into daily practice.

Another element of authenticity is that you need to be clear about what you want to accomplish for the greater good. Leadership, after all, is about leading others. When faced with situations that are threatening or discomfiting, having a sense of purpose gives you a reason to move ahead anyway. Instead of worrying about how they appear to others, strong leaders devote their attention to what must be done to produce desired outcomes. Your commitment to that overarching purpose is ultimately what defines you as a leader, gives meaning to your work, and conveys your authenticity to others.

The good news is that leadership styles can be learned. Learning a leadership style is no different than learning other complex skills. It requires a clear vision of what you want to learn and plenty of practice. To develop leadership behaviors, begin by assessing the leadership styles you use most often. Think about a situation where you were especially effective and try to understand what made it so and what you can do to improve it even more. Then think of an encounter that was not as successful and analyze that the same way. If you see that a particular style is not working for you, try to determine what you do that may be undermining your efforts. “Observe yourself” by being conscious of your behavior and the reactions of others. Ask people you trust to observe you and give you feedback. Some leaders use a coach for this purpose.

In addition to the styles that are working for you, try out some new ones. Observe a leader you admire and choose one thing he or she does that that seems to be highly effective. Try out that approach when you have a chance (in a fairly low-risk situation if possible). Note how you feel, how others react to you, and whether it produces the results you want. Ask someone who was present for an assessment of what you did. Even better, ask someone in advance to observe and give you feedback. Again, a coach may helpful.

Leadership development programs are especially valuable for helping women find effective ways to deal with the gender-related challenges of leadership. Women-focused leadership programs provide environments where women feel “safe” to experiment with different styles and decide which ones feel right and work well. Law firm women’s initiatives can provide training, practice opportunities and group support for women who strive to become leaders. Outside programs, like the Hastings Leadership Academy for Women ( and courses put on by the ABA and National Association of Women Lawyers, provide other forums where women can learn leadership skills, styles and strategies.

Women lawyers rightfully place a high value on authentic leadership. They struggle with authenticity because they frequently face situations where expectations of them as women and as leaders are in conflict. Rather than fretting over how to meet others’ contradictory expectations or avoiding leadership altogether, women should expand their leadership skills, use styles that match objectives, and focus on their greater purpose as leaders.


[1] Robin J. Ely, Herminia Ibarra and Deborah M. Kolb, “Taking Gender into Account: Theory and Design for Women’s Leadership Development Programs,” Academy of Management Learning and Education, Volume 10, Number 3, September 2011

[2] Ibid.

Recent Publications

ABA Woman Advocate, Winter Newsletter (subscription required)

View All Articles >

Upcoming Events

WILEF Annual Meeting and WILEF Certification Luncheon

September 12, 2012

The Women in Law Empowerment Forum (WILEF) is hosting a luncheon on September 12, 2012, to honor the firms that have met WILEF certification standards for having women in top leadership roles and among their most highly compensated partners. As Chair of the WILEF Certification Committee, I will welcome and present awards to certifying firms. The firms that have been certified are listed on the WILEF website.

National Legal Mentoring Consortium Conference

October 4, 2012 - October 6, 2012

The National Legal Mentoring Consortium, a newly formed organization, is holding a conference on mentoring at the University of St. Thomas Law School in Minneapolis, October 4-6, 2012. I am on the Executive Committee of the NLMC and will deliver the keynote address on “Mentoring as a Way to Improve Gender Equity in the Legal Profession.” Details and registration information appear on the Consortium’s website.

View All Events >

Media in which I am featured

Jacey Fortin, “Crossing the Gender Line: Why Mentor Men?,” The Glass Hammer, February 16, 2012

Viva Chen, Top Law Firms for Women (for Money and Power), The Careerist, June 13, 2012

Melissa J. Anderson, “Networking with Women,” The Glass Hammer, June 20, 2012

A Field Guide for Mobile Attorneys, Attorney at Large, June 29, 2012

View All Interviews >

Interviews & Media

Career Traps Women Must Avoid

September 27, 2012

Webcast: West LegalEd Center, “Career Traps Women Must Avoid” 4pm EDT.

Keeping the Peace: How Associates and Partners Can Work Together Without a Battle

September 10, 2012

ABA Journal Podcast: "Keeping the Peace: How Associates and Partners Can Work Together Without a Battle ," with Stephanie Ward (Moderator), Mark Herrmann and Jennifer Bluestein