WHY DIVERSITY? retical but real,” as “the skills needed in today’s increasingly global marketplace can only be developed through exposure to widely diverse people, cultures, ideas, and viewpoints.” 11 This observation is backed by empirical research. One study of data from 366 compa-nies evidenced a strong correlation between diversity and fi nancial performance: compa-nies in the top quartile for racial and ethnic diversity were 35 percent more likely to have fi nancial returns above the median for their industries. 12 Several factors contribute to these outcomes, including the ability to attract strong employees from a broader talent pool, better orientation with and ability to relate to diverse customers, increased employee satisfaction and morale, and a higher level of innovation and creativity fostered by an environment in which differing cultures and perspectives contribute to the development of new ideas. 13 Increased diversity has also been linked to improved employee productivity and performance, a decrease in lawsuits, broader market opportunities, and an enhanced busi-ness image. 14 The same business benefi ts translate to the industry of law. The recruitment of diverse lawyers and support staff can help law fi rms attract business from clients who are operating in a global market where differing backgrounds and perspectives are an everyday reality. 15 In some cases, moreover, a lack of diversity can lead directly to the loss of existing client relationships. A 2011 survey on this topic revealed that 12.5 percent of corpora-tions had reduced or terminated the use of specifi c outside law fi rms due to poor diversity performance. 16 Three other diversity rationales unique to the legal profession are also signifi cant. The fi rst is the “democracy rationale,” which recognizes that diversity in the bar and on the bench enhances the trust of a diverse citizenry in the mechanisms of government and the rule of law. The second is the “leadership rationale,” which notes the importance of inclusivity in civic leadership positions, which often are fi lled by lawyers. The third is the “demograph-ic rationale,” which emphasizes the importance of having a group of attorneys whose differing backgrounds better equip them to respond to a citizenry that is increasingly diverse, having been projected to become “majority minority” by 2042. 17 Further perspectives on the importance of diversity are offered by Sharron Gatling, www.vsb.org who, as Assistant Director of Diversity for the College of William and Mary, is part of the pipeline that helps supply the Virginia State Bar with future attorneys. Gatling notes that an absence of diversity, particularly in top positions within any institution, can lead to decisions that overlook the needs of groups whose perspectives are absent from the policy making table. As an example, she points to the development of leave policies, which can be vital to women (including attorneys) in their childbearing years. If leave decisions are made by an executive management group that is predominantly or exclusively male, the fami-ly-related needs of female employees can easily be overlooked. Gatling adds that there is a particular “need for lawyers who have an understand-ing of implicit bias.” Cultural differences can affect the way people understand each other, leading to disputes that a legal system with inadequate diversity will be ill-equipped to resolve. Lawyers must “be able to understand how other people think and behave.” Attorneys of all backgrounds can do this more effectively if they are exposed to diverse perspectives, not only within the profession but also during their legal education. Diversity, Gatling notes, extends “past race and ethnicity.” It encompasses a variety of personal characteristics, includ-ing sex, disability, gender identity, and gender expression. Ultimately, Gatling fears, a lack of diversi-ty among those charged with enforcement of the law undermines trust in the system among groups who may feel that their viewpoints are overlooked. One of many factors believed to have contributed to widespread civil un-rest following the 2014 shooting of Michael Brown was the composition of the Ferguson, Missouri police department, whose 54-person force included only four women and four African Americans in a town whose residents were 55 percent female and more than two-thirds African-American. 18 Similarly, Gatling concludes, if the broader legal system fails to refl ect the demographics of the community it serves, underrepresented segments of that community “won’t feel justice” and instead will see the system as a “threat to them.” Why Diversity? continued on page 45 VSB DIVERSITY CONFERENCE | Vol. 67 | August 2018 | VIRGINIA LAWYER 37