Redesigning Law Conference 2004

Sucess Stories:
As part of our work we actively collect stories from people who have redesigned work and family for a more balanced life. You can find some of their stories below. Many of these people will also be attending the conference. Unless otherwise noted, their names have been changed to ensure confidentiality.

(If you or someone you know has agreat story as well, EMAIL US. You might see your story on our website one day!)

Redesigning Work: These stories include examples of people who have redesigned work to have more time for life.
Lilly | Jennie | Steph | Lindsey

Redesigning Family: These stories include examples of people who have redesigned family for a variety of reasons that led them to a more fulfilling life.
Laura & Robert

Redesigning Leadership: These stories include examples of leaders who have found ways to redesign the traditional leadership role to have a more balanced life and change a cycle of overwork reinforcement in the workplace.
Jim*

*Jim Sandman is a Managing Partner at Arnold & Porter. With his permission, his name has not been changed in the account he has written below, "Excerpts from Remarks for the Working Mother WorkLife Congress."

Lilly's Current Solution

Type of law –
Lily works in high-end commercial litigation and insurance litigation. She is a shareholder in the firm.

Current workweek –
Lily works M-Th, 9-5:30. She generally has Fridays off, however, currently, she is working a 6 week (summer) alternative schedule of M, T, Th full days, and W & F half days. She has a 30-minute train ride commute to work. Lily tries not to work too much from home, but when she needs to she does. She works 80% time for 80% pay. She typically stays on schedule but rhetorically ask, “Client demands are client demands: what can you do?”

Length of employment and arrangement –
Lily has been with this firm for five years, working full time prior to the birth of her daughter, two years ago. During maternity leave she proposed a flextime schedule and it was approved. She has now been working four days a week for almost two years.

Motivation –
“Having my daughter was my motivation.” She and her husband decided they did not want their daughter in day care so they hired a live-in au pair. “This creates more flexibility for us,” Lily says, enabling the couple to both maintain their careers while also allowing for time with their daughter.

Set Up of Work Redesign

Negotiated changes –
Lily and a few of her co-workers were pregnant together at the same time. They investigated the firm’s policies as a group, but eventually chose different work-family schedules. Lily’s proposal included the four-days-a-week option, and her manager approved it during maternity leave.

Support –
Both Lily’s managers and co-workers are very supportive of her arrangement, although a few co-workers often forget she is not in on Fridays. Lily likes to stick to her schedule, but will work around peoples’ needs; for the most part her co-workers seem to understand.

Changes in schedule and physical presence –
Compared to working fulltime, Lily more often works from home now when she needs to. For example, on her days off she may work during nap time, when she can get sufficient free time to get concentrated work completed. “Part-time workers are under a microscope, Lily says, “which compels them get their work done more efficiently to stay in good light.”

Managing a non-traditional schedule –

Benefits-
“I work more efficiently, Lily says, “I get my work done. Time is not your own, it’s restricted. I have learned to revise my work around the needs of my daughter. She gets my undivided attention when it’s our time to do our thing. Time with her enhances my life and her’s.”

Drawbacks-
Basically, Lily concedes, she is “always multi-tasking and always juggling.” If Lily misses anything important on Fridays, her team leader fills her in. However, Lily is always reachable and her clients and co-workers are aware that she can be reached.

Changes in workflow –
Lily’s workload is meant to remain steady. She has some control over the amount of work, saying no to some projects or handing them off to others if necessary.

Changes in substitution –
Lily is able to delegate more work to other people but sometimes has difficulty doing so. She has learned to say no to additional work, saying she is busy instead of taking on the work and feeling stressed.

Impact on work –
Lily says her ability to meet work demands has increased, and she has become more efficient in using her four days to complete work tasks. She has learned to fit everything in the allotted time. “I have a more realistic view of what I can do,” she says. “It is difficult to complete 100% of the work on an 80% schedule.”

Wins From Integration

Benefits/challenges –
The biggest benefit, Lily says, is having the ability to spend time with her daughter on a regular basis. The biggest challenge is trying to find an extra hour in the day to do everything.

Personal strengths/weaknesses –

Strengths-
Lily is good at organizing and multitasking. Another strong skill is her ability to maintain an accurate calendar.

Weakness-
Lily says her biggest weakness is her guilt. She asks herself often, “Am I doing the right thing [with work and family]?”

Unexpected “win-wins” –
Lily’s responsibilities have shifted from dividing her time between litigation and analysis, to all litigation. She says the firm recognizes her abilities and knows she can handle the responsibilities. She works very efficiently, surprising even herself at times.

Multi-tasking –
Lily can relate better with clients who are themselves parents of young children. Parenting and children is an easy icebreaker. She feels talking about her daughter and the issues around parenting is a “good marketing tool.” Lily is on the board at her daughter’s preschool and see some of her involvement there as part of multitasking. She says that with everything going on in her life, her “head spins” sometimes. Her personal relationships, such as friendships suffer because she just doesn’t have the time.

Transferable skills –
Lily says there are countless skills that she uses across the board. She is good at “To Do Lists” and finds them helpful at work and also at home.

24-7 Workplace –
“It’s a wash,” comments Lily. She is accessible 24-7 and can always be reached. She finds this aspect to be difficult sometimes but something you just have to deal with. “Sometimes I feel part-time workers are expected to be even more accessible than full time workers!”

Jennie's Current Solution

Type of law -
Jennie works for a law firm in a major city on the East Coast doing litigation, insurance work, policy, employment law and commercial disputes. Jennie made partner working part-time and has been a partner for 4.5 years.

Current workweek -
Jennie works Monday thru Thursday from 8:00am to 4:30pm. She leaves the office promptly at 4:30 due to her afternoon responsibilities with her children. She works from home on Fridays when her workload is very busy, but only on occasion. She has a 35 minute train ride commute to work everyday and does not do a lot of outside traveling for work. She is flexible, however: if a judge calls and needs her, for example, she is willing to flex her hours to get the task completed.

Length of employment and arrangement -
Jennie has been with this firm for 13 _ years, and began her part time arrangement 6 months after she started. She was hired pregnant with her first child , and after taking her maternity leave, returned on a four day schedule.

Motivation -
“Absolutely, my motivation was my daughter.” During maternity leave, she revised her schedule to work 4 days a week.

Negotiated changes -
“I didn’t have to do a lot of negotiating,” says Jennie. “My firm has always been very open to this.”

Support -
Jennie’s firm strongly supports part-time workers. Jennie has never had any problems with her supervisor or her co-workers. “Everyone is very supportive. This has been a wonderful and easy experience for me.”

Changes in schedule and physical presence -
“There really were not any major changes,” Jennie says. She still works in the office but email/voicemail and cell phones help. She leaves at 4:30pm almost without exception. “Work to home is an easy transition for me.”

Managing a non-traditional schedule -
“I am not a quiet person,” Jennie explains. “I established the rules from the beginning. But in this career you need to be flexible. People just have to remember that I have Fridays off.” Sometimes she is required to remind people and has to work to make sure her flexed schedule does not cause problems.

Changes in workflow -
“I don’t really have a heavier or lighter workload compared to anyone else. But I know I can’t do any of the emergency work and I don’t have as many cases to juggle.” Jennie comments this is due to her partnership status, not because of her part-time schedule. “I do have more administrative responsibilities and non-legal work than before, but that is just part of being partner.”

Changes in substitution -
As a firm partner, Jennie delegates responsibilities to others. “Being senior, I have more control over my workload.”

Managing workload creep -
“In litigation work, you don’t have a lot of control over when it speeds up or gets real busy. Sometimes I don’t have a lot of control over how much my work load creeps higher.” Jennie just says she doesn’t just take on another case or more work when she is really busy. But she doesn’t consider this to be any different for other people working in law, regardless of the hours they work.

Impact on work -
“I think part-timers are more efficient in their work. I know I have to leave if I want to get home to be with my kids.” She says she tends to eat lunch at her desk so she doesn’t waste that hour, and she discusses matters less often with people in the office. “I have learned to manage my time much better.”

Benefits/challenges -
“I like the flexibility. There is more extra time to be involved in school activities. I really wouldn’t give this up for anything.”

Challenges-
“It is challenging to juggle home responsibilities, my kids and work.”

Personal strengths/weaknesses -
“I am definitely good at time management. I work efficiently and get things done when I get the task, instead of waiting until the day before it is due. My motto is: Do it now!”

Weaknesses-
Jennie is a "perfectionist”. She is under a great deal of pressure to work everything in, and sometimes she feels she is failing at both motherhood and work. “I often wonder if I can really do both. I am pretty efficient but always feel like I stretch myself too thin.”e.

Unexpected "win-wins" -
“People say they love to work with part-timers because they work so efficiently. That is a positive factor.” She mentions it is good for recruiting purposes because the firm supports flexible hours. “Quality of life is important to the firm, not face time.”

Multi-tasking -
Jennie doesn’t try to blend work and family responsibilities too often. She recalls a time where she dropped her daughter off at dance practice and sat in the car on her cell phone making arrangements. “Cell phones are a great thing!” she adds. It gets frustrating not being able to give her full attention and feeling like she is pulled in two different directions constantly. “But basically that is what it is all about for a working mom.”

Transferable skills -
Jennie’s strengths lie in her abilities to handle many different things. “I am able to juggle and multi-task a number of balls all at the same time.”

24-7 Workplace -
Jennie says technology makes it easier to work part-time. With voicemail, cell phones and the ability to check email from home, it is easier to stay in touch. But at the same time, “technology makes it harder to get away.” People think on her days off she just sits around at home doing nothing. Jennie says technology makes it easier to work part-time. With voicemail, cell phones and the ability to check email from home, it is easier to stay in touch. But at the same time, “technology makes it harder to get away.” People think on her days off she just sits around at home doing nothing.

Home life –
Jennie has 2 school-aged children, and her partner works full time. Both parents make it a priority to be home for dinner. Both Jennie and her partner share in caring for their children when they are sick.

Steph's Current Solution

Type of law -
Steph works as an environmental Attorney for the federal government. She mostly works independently with clients.

Current workweek -
Currently, Steph works an estimated 24 hours, 2 days in the office and 2 days from home. She has 1 day off during the week, Fridays most of the time. She has a 45-minute commute to work.
Steph’s schedule changes often, but mostly due to family reasons, not work demands.

Length of employment and arrangement -
Steph has been working for this government agency for 13 years with an always-changing schedule. Before having children, Steph worked as a full time employee.
Throughout the years, Steph has worked varying hours from 32 hrs to 16 hrs. “Working for the government, there are definite rules concerning working at home and flexible work hours, but those rules provide managers with a fair amount of discretion. My hours have decreased over the years.” She attributes the changes mostly to different family demands and also the different developmental stages of her children.
“I mostly change my hours due to different demands in the workplace, increase in my workload, and family demands.”

Motivation -
“Definitely, time with the kids.” Steph is able to come into the office early in the morning (7am) and has arranged her work time around the need to be home for the children in the afternoons. She says she has definitely been able to be successful working part- time. “I’ve never really had any major problems.”

Set Up of Work Redesign

Negotiated changes -
Steph has a very supportive managerial staff that is especially supportive within her division. She wrote a formal memo requesting to put in part-time hours and it was basically approved without any discussion. If there are changes to her time/schedule, she discusses it with her supervisor and if he/she approves, Steph submits the paperwork to her supervisor for approval.

Steph is able to increase and decrease work time hours between 16-32 hours a week (the hours for which a part-time employee can work) when she wishes. Her job responsibilities are often very predictable and she has a manageable workload. The major deadlines are predictable and this predictability allows her to control her schedule.

The agency policies for working at home are well-defined (with formal policies for working from home) and Steph says that she “pushes the limits” sometimes. For example, due to health issues with her son, for about a year Steph was able to work from home to take care of her son. Within the policies, one is not usually allowed to work completely from home, but under the circumstances, this was allowed.
Her workplace’s term for working at home or at a location other than the office “flexi-place.”

Support -
Steph’s particular division within her office is extremely supportive of her work schedule. Many people have created part-time scheduled within her division and in other divisions in her office, but she says she has definitely been creative in making up her schedule, “but not too off scale”
On paper, for budgeting purposes, she is counted as a full-time employee even though she works part-time. Sometimes this burdens a division that has part-time employees because it makes it difficult for them to justify the need to hire additional employees when on paper it seems that they have full-time employees. This is one reason some offices or divisions are less open to part-time arrangements. This hasn’t been raised as an issue within Stephs particular division.

Changes in schedule and physical presence -
Steph alters her work hours when it is appropriate to work more or less. “I change hours to suit my family’s needs and my office’s needs.” Currently, she works early mornings, which enables her to be home by 2:30 when the children get home from school. Her husband does “morning duty.”
“I work very independently.” She mentions that even when she is at work, she mostly works with clients over the phone or through email, so being in the office or working from home doesn’t impact her ability to complete her work demands and there is no major differences.

Managing a non-traditional schedule -
“I see only benefits to my schedule.” Steph says she makes herself available, for example, her clients know that she can be reached during non-working hours from home and she says she invites them to call after hours. “ I try to be as accommodating as I can.” She also says that she feels this is the way to stay connected more.
Drawbacks include the difficulties that arise from trying to juggle everything. “My focus is split, I have more balls in the air.” She refers to stay at home mothers who do it all and says she still feels that she gives her children the same things as if she were a stay at home mother but also is keeping one foot in the professional door.
Steph doesn’t really miss conversation in the office, especially since the work done is mostly independently completed. “Because the nature of the work, I rarely work with other people in my office.”

“I am more selective to what I attend.” Steph does not attend meeting that don’t apply to her and more often a supervisor will attend the meetings she can’t make. If she does miss something important, she simply discusses it with someone who attended to keep updated.

Changes in workflow -
Over the years, Steph has begun to take on less and less but is still successful in her job role/ expectations. She is keeping one foot in the door, but choose to take on predictable, not high-profile assignments, which in turn enables her to be flexible and keep low stress levels in the workplace.

Changes in substitution -
Sometimes Steph will ask other attorneys to take on some of the work she has to do on some projects and delegates matters they can handle to complete for her. This happens mostly when there is overflow work that needs to be done or if she becomes busy handling litigation. “If I were full time, I wouldn’t need any additional help.”

Managing workload creep -
“I am selective in what I take on.” Steph occasionally gets help from other attorneys, declines the invites to meetings that don’t apply to her or if they don’t need a legal person there. Steph doesn’t often travel to conferences and is just more selective in what she takes on.

Impact on work -
Basically it has not impacted her work abilities. Steph works efficiently when she is busy and not so much when she isn’t as busy, just like anyone else. “Efficiency depends on time crunch and how critical the work is.”
Steph doesn’t go out to lunch often, doesn’t socialize in the office often and doesn’t attend to extra personal interactions in the workplace. “I can’t afford the time, I just don’t have it. It hasn’t hurt me but if I had the time I would choose to go.” The time she spends at work is the time she focuses on doing her work.

Wins From Integration

Benefits/challenges -
“I feel like I am there for my family.” The flexibility enables her to be there for her children after school; she can help the kids with their homework, take them to practices, be there when friends come over and overall just be there for them.

“It’s like a stay at home mom, but I keep one foot in the door.” Steph notes that she often feels that her job is just a way to stay in the professional mode, but that work is sometimes only that. Having chosen to take on lower profile assignments at work, she is better able to focus on her family’s needs and her ability to really “be there.”

Steph also find it “healthy” to be at work and in that environment. “It’s good for everyone” (meaning herself, her children and her husband). “I probably have a good mix.”

Challenges-
“The feeling like I should be able to do everything a stay at home mom does is the most challenging for me.” Steph expresses that expectations of what she can and should she do with and for her family is sometimes unreasonable due to the time she dedicates to work every week.

“I never really give myself a break.” (Later when Steph re-read the interview she thought this was an overstatement.)

Personal strengths/weaknesses -
Strengths
“Being willing to push the boundaries.” Steph’s part-time schedule sometimes “pushes” the limit of what’s been done in her division but she is willing to ask for what she wants. She tries not to advertise the solution/flexibility she has but appreciates what she has.

Weaknesses-
“Needing to be in control and wanting to do everything.” “What I mean by this that I want to give 100% and be in control at work and at home, and that is sometimes hard to do. You can’t really do that when you are not either at work or at home all the time.”

Unexpected “win-wins”
Steph attributes the ability to work a flexible schedule to her staying in the division she is in. “I wouldn’t be here, doing this job, if I didn’t have these options.” Steph says that her current assignment is not too high profile or the most challenging and many attorneys have chosen to pass on this assignment to others after mastering it for that reason but she has stuck with it despite opportunities to trade it for more high profile work because she feels it really does work for everyone.
In talking about her flexibility options she says. “Knowing you have it if you need it is great.”

Multi-tasking -
Just like everyone else, Steph feels like she is just too busy all the time.

Transferable skills -
Steph feels as though her work and her family are in different worlds. One thing she definitely has learned is to be patient with people and tasks at work and vise versa, just as she has learned to be patient with her children’s needs. Steph feels as though she has “the best of both worlds.”

24-7 Workplace -
Steph said that this issue doesn’t apply to a government job as much as other jobs. Technology definitely has made her work schedule possible.

Home Life-
Steph has three school age children. Steph has always had babysitters come into the household to assist childcare. Her husband is a full time attorney that has some flexibility in his job when he needs to.

Lindsey's Current Solution

Type of law
Lindsey works at a law firm in an east coast city doing primarily commercial litigation; she works on large cases as special counsel. The law firm as a whole has approximately 300 lawyers, with 110 of them partners; the office where Lindsey works has 25 lawyers, 7 of whom are partners.

Current workweek
Lindsey works M-Th, 8:30 am to 5:30pm. She works 80%, and has Fridays off from work. She has a 30-minute train ride commute and works from home when needed. If she is asked to do something outside of her schedule, she accommodates the requests. She does not travel for work often.

Length of employment and arrangement
Lindsey has only been with her current firm since April 2003, and started out working a compressed workweek schedule. Previously, she had worked 16 years at another firm, and part of that time had worked a very similar schedule following the birth of her first child.

Motivation
“Definitely, the birth of my children and wanting to be with them was my motivation,” Lindsey says. She had worked three days a week at her old firm for two years, but found that schedule to be extremely stressful. Often, even though she was supposed to work just three days a week, she often ended up working at least four. “It’s hard to do just three days in this type of work. Now, at four days a week, I at least have some balance.”

Set Up of Work Redesign
Negotiated changes
Since Lindsey has always worked this schedule at her new firm, she did not need to negotiate any changes.

Support
Lindsey came to this firm with a very supportive partner she had worked with at the previous firm. Says Lindsey, her co-workers are “very supportive of this arrangement, and do things to make it work for me.” They know they can call her at home if necessary.

Managing a non-traditional schedule
“I am much more effective than full time people. I rarely go out to lunch; I’d rather work and know I am getting out of here on time,” says Lindsey. She works on a fewer number of cases and takes on the workload at a rate that she can handle. “I have cut back on what I can do.”
“I can say ‘no,’ but sometimes that just doesn’t really work. I try to accommodate requests and people call me at home. Email has been a real godsend and a pain in the neck all at the same time,” she says, noting the high increase number of emails she receives. So far her policy has been that she can be reached at anytime; people know if they need her, they can simply call her at home, which they do.

Changes in workflow and substitution, managing work load creep
Being part-time, she takes on fewer cases. “I can’t control deadlines. I am able to control the amount of work by not getting involved if I am already working to capacity. Now that I am more senior, however, I can delegate. I delegate all the time. I wouldn’t trade my scheduled time with my children for anything”.

Impact on work
“My schedule has dramatically improved my work because I have learned to be much more efficient in my job”.

Wins From Integration
Benefits
Time with her children. Working this schedule takes the pressure off. When they are in school, she is able to do things on her Fridays off, so there is more time with the children on the weekends; she is able to be involved. “I am able to volunteer at school and go on school trips, those sorts of things.”

Challenges
“It is challenging to manage workload creep. It is also hard for me to turn it off when I am out of the office.”

Personal strengths/weaknesses

Strength
Determination: Lindsey puts her family first.

Weakness
If there was something she would like to make better, it was to be more organized. “I am not too well organized,” she admits.

Unexpected “win-wins”
“I am happier at work and so the firm benefits from that.” At her previous firm, she was a role model for family friendly work environments; she benefited from their recruiting top quality female lawyers in this way. Lindsey believes she was good publicity as an example of a part-time partner. (At the previous firm it had taken Lindsey 12 years to become partner, but she gave that up to work for the current firm). Being multi-dimensional has benefited her firm.

Multi-tasking
She works remotely, often working when the children were napping, or doing something low-key. She is generally available when she is home so people can always contact her. She mentioned that she is not good at turning work off, however. “My kids know when my attention is not there.” Lindsey says that multi-tasking is a skill she uses in and out of her work life. She is always “doing a lot of things at once.”

24-7 Workplace
“People’s perception of part-time workers is that they are not as committed to the demands of the firm and the clients. I don’t agree. I am 100% committed to my job and also 100% to my family. If necessary, at home I can do anything that needs to be done in the office.” She gives an example of a major snowstorm and how she was home for a week with the children and still got the job done. “Going to the office is almost like getting away from the distractions at home. But your time isn’t your own.” She concludes that without email she would have a much harder time doing her job.

Back to top>>>

Following their Hearts: Laura and Robert's Transition to Shared Care

Laura and Robert had never intentionally planned a Shared Care lifestyle. When Laura, an associate at a Boston law firm, gave birth to Chaz, she was nervous about juggling everything. She hadn't realized how consumed she would be with her son. But her husband Robert's sales income was variable and not certain enough to support the family. She also knew she didn't
want to leave behind a successful career, so she went back to work full time after a short maternity leave. The couple hired a full-time nanny who also helped out with household chores. Chaz loved his nanny, and this situation worked well for a couple of years.
Full-time at her law firm meant that Laura was putting in between 40 to 65 hours a week. Robert's schedule allowed for more flexibility, but could also be demanding. Both of their workloads - and hours - were unpredictable. Laura's parents would babysit on the weekends when necessary, and having a nanny lessened the workload at home.

The boiling point ...
Around Chaz' second birthday, Laura worked on a trial that lasted for several months. "I was working nights and weekends - Mother's Day, Memorial Day, and the 4th of July-it was just awful."

During this time Robert happily filled in the gaps at home. "Robert has always been critically supportive of what I wanted to do," Laura remarks. In fact, even during this period of high stress for Laura, Robert never complained or said that he felt like he was doing too much; it was Laura who was feeling overwhelmed.

Laura felt she needed more time with her family and a breather from work. She wanted to make a change and create a new pace of life that would allow her regular time with her son. To do this, Laura knew she would have to first clarify what she wanted; whatever her decision, she knew Robert would be fully supportive.

She approached her mentor (and the chairman of her firm), and asked if it would be possible to cut back to 90% by taking every other Friday off. He approved, and since he felt she would continue to carry her own weight at work, did not institute a pay cut.

A year later, Laura was promoted to contract partner, but she hadn't taken a single Friday off. Chaz was about to start pre-school, and Laura continued to feel dissatisfied with how things were going. Her goal of having more time with Chaz hadn't materialized, but she still felt just as strongly about wanting change. Once again, Laura knew she needed to recommit to the goal of finding more time with her son, including regular time to be involved at his school.
She would have to risk taking another big step to make more significant change. Laura was worried about requesting a four-day workweek, but a friend encouraged her to go for what she really wanted. Again, she approached the chairman of the firm, and again, with no reservations, he granted her request. To her surprise, it turned out all she had to do was ask.
This time, she was also much more successful in scaling back on her work. Although she often took calls from clients on her day off, and occasionally worked weekends, on the whole she was better able to contain her workweek to four days, and only occasionally needed to go into the office on the fifth day. Robert picked Chaz up from school at 3 p.m., and then worked from home in the late afternoons and evenings. On Laura's "day off," she spent time running errands and being at Chaz's school. The two of them would enjoy their time together having lunch and playing.

An unexpected solution: both parents create more time for family
Over time, Laura and Robert evolved a new work-family solution and rhythm in their lives that took advantage of the varying degrees of flexibility in each of their jobs. Selling real estate, Robert spent a lot of his workday in the car. He could more easily shop for groceries because he was driving by the stores anyway. He was also the one to cook dinner, since he generally
got home before Laura did (and "is a better cook anyway" Laura adds). As a result, when
Laura got home, she was free to hang out with their son.

"It wasn't the sort of thing where we sat down and said, 'This isn't working because I'm doing too much here, or you're doing too much there,'" Laura explains. "It was more circumstantial." Each of the parents took on the tasks that came most naturally. Robert did bath time, while Laura straightened up the house and got Chaz into pajamas and did the bedtime reading and cuddling routine. "We never definitively talked about it," says Robert. "We just have the routine and it works just fine. Everybody's happy."

Then Laura got pregnant, with what turned out to be a difficult pregnancy. Four months before she was due, Laura was confined to bed. This was a difficult time for the couple, they had trouble finding regular help at home and Robert was required to handle all of the home and childcare responsibilities they usually shared and then some. "He had to do everything," Laura explains.

After the birth of their second son, Andy, Laura and Robert hired a new nanny. Laura returned to work four days a week, but once again felt torn. She wanted more time with her children and, within just a few weeks of returning from maternity leave, Laura asked the managing partner of the firm if she could cut back to a three-day workweek. "Absolutely," was the partner's answer. Not long after, Laura was made an equity partner.

After their "new" nanny left, Laura and Robert decided to enroll Andy in daycare three days a week, as they were exhausted from the process of finding new nannies. On the days that Laura worked, Robert was in charge of picking Chaz up from school and Andy from daycare. The other two days, the baby was with Laura or Laura's parents if she needed to get to the office.

The unexpected gifts: building a good life together
Laura and Robert have been sharing the care of their young sons for more than five years now. Andy is in kindergarten and Chaz is in third grade. Without planning to do so, Laura and Robert developed a work-family solution that allows both parents to pursue their careers while remaining connected to their children's lives. Laura and Robert both say the adjustments they have made have brought them closer together as a couple, and that their arrangement discourages resentment. Both parents are working outside the home, and both contribute inside the home as well. "I think a lot of it was necessity, a lot of it was desire, and a lot of it was evolution," says Laura.

Their children have provoked a change in how Laura and Robert feel about their work. Laura still services her clients to the best of her abilities and is available by phone and computer on her days off, but she doesn't feel as compelled to volunteer for extra assignments and she has cut out some lower priority tasks. She has also worked hard to be more flexible and realistic with herself, and to readjust work days in order to stay actively involved in her children's schools.

Although there are periods of time when Robert works a lot of weekends, his somewhat malleable schedule continues to allow him to be actively engaged with their children while growing his career. Robert has also made the decision not to aggressively advertise, relying instead on word of mouth. "I'm not one of the really high profile sales people out there," he says. In truth, he adds, "if I were to try to be more aggressive in my business so that Laura wouldn't have to work, I think I would go crazy. I would have to spend a lot more time in the office doing marketing on the phone all day. I've never been able to sit in an office for more than an hour or two at a time. I have to get up and do something."

Laura and Robert have also made some material sacrifices - they live in a smaller home than they would otherwise, don't drive fancy cars and pass on some of the other extra amenities a number of their peers have acquired. "But we have a different kind of wealth," says Laura. "I suppose we're somewhat unconventional," Robert adds, "but these days almost everything is unconventional. We're unconventional in that we are together and happy after twelve years, with two careers and two kids."

Redesigning Leadership
“WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAD MAKES”
Jim Sandman
Managing Partner, Arnold & Porter
Excerpts from Remarks for the Working Mother WorkLife Congress
October 1, 2003

I think there are few things more effective in improving work/life balance for working mothers than to permit and encourage working fathers to spend more time on parenting.

Thirteen years ago, when my wife and I had our first child, I took a six-month sabbatical to be a full-time father. My wife, who is also a lawyer, was able to take no more than three months’ maternity leave. I began my sabbatical the day she returned to work, the day our son turned three months old, and I stayed home to care for him until the day he turned nine months old. I did not work at all during that period and was paid half my full time rate. I’d like to describe four lessons I learned from my experience that have affected my perspective as a manager.

Lesson 1: Caring for a baby is time-consuming and stressful.

My life lost its structure while I was at home full-time. I lost my ability to plan. I had thought that caring for my son would be a part-time responsibility, and that I would have plenty of time to do what I wanted to do when I wanted to do it – to go hiking, to visit museums, to read, to play the piano – all with my son with me, of course. But I did few of those things, except when my wife was home, because my time alone with my son was controlled by his needs.

I bought a journal to record my experience. There are two entries in that journal. I wrote the first the night before my sabbatical began. I wrote the second the night it ended. I had no time to write in between – not because I was engaged in an unending string of leisure activities, but because caring for a baby, especially one who does not nap and who takes two hours to get through a single bottle, was, for me at least, all-consuming.

I found caring for a baby demanding when I was not working at all outside the home, when I had no traditional job to have to balance against my family responsibilities. My experience in this regard affected my perspective as a manager profoundly. It caused me to realize, in a way I otherwise likely would not have, that when a primary-care parent is dealing not only with the pressures of family responsibilities, but also with the pressures of the workplace, anything an employer can do to help ease those burdens will be among the most valued benefits the employer can provide.

Lesson 2: Caring for a baby full-time is isolating.

I was alone most of the time during the day. The only regular substantive contact I had with adults while my wife was at work came once a week for two hours, when I went to “Mothers’ Group.” “Mothers’ Group” was six new, full-time mothers, all of whom had a baby about the age of my son, who got together to share experiences and enjoy the company of other adults. Six new mothers – and me. I was the only father in Mothers’ Group. I don’t think I ever missed a meeting. I craved the adult contact.

It was very important to me that my wife arrive home at a regular, predictable time every night. I needed to know when my shift was over, when I would be able to talk to her, when I would be able to share child-care duties. I also cooked dinner every night, and I needed to know when it had to be ready, and that when it was ready, my wife would be home to eat it. If her employer required that she stay late unexpectedly, if a crisis came up, it not only caused problems for her, and kept her from our son, it caused problems for me. I came to realize that good management of people requires recognizing the importance of predictability of schedule, to the maximum extent possible, particularly for people with families, and that the person who needs to be home at a fixed time is not uncommitted, or unprofessional, or suffering from some other character defect.

Lesson 3: Finding child care you are comfortable with is hard.

Before my sabbatical, I had thought that, as long as you could afford to pay for quality child care, you had an array of attractive options to choose from. During my sabbatical, one of my responsibilities was to plan for the day when I would have to go back to work, and to find child care for our son. When I began to consider specific options, I came to understood that what is right for any child and his or her parents, what you as a parent are comfortable with, is a deeply personal matter.

I went to look at a day care center that came highly recommended. The first stop on the tour was the crib room. I was aghast. This center did not permit parents to decorate their child’s crib or to bring anything from home to personalize the crib – not a stuffed animal, not a special blanket, not a picture of Mom and Dad. I made up my mind in that room, the first stop on the tour, that we would not enroll our son there. I could not bear the thought of him lying in his crib without any reminder of his mother, of his home, or of me. My wife and I subsequently interviewed prospective nannies to provide in-home, but not live-in, care. We did not have many choices, and we were not enthusiastic about the choices we had. We hired the best candidate we were able to identify.

The day I went back to work was one of the hardest days of my life. I took no comfort in the at-home care I had arranged. I thought of my son every minute. It was weeks before I could concentrate for sustained periods at work.

Lesson 4: This is the most important lesson for the point I want to emphasize. The opportunity my firm gave me to stay home and care for our son was a tremendous benefit not only for me and for our son, but also for my wife.

Father-friendly benefits are one of the most effective ways to help mothers. My wife was able to return to work in about as good a frame of mind as possible because I was able to take over the full-time care of our child from her. Knowing that our son would be spending the first nine months of his life with one or the other of his parents was a great comfort.

Work/life balance issues, work/family balance issues, are not just women’s issues. If we think of them as women’s issues, there is a real limit to how much progress we can make in achieving real work/life balance. In fact, I believe that work/life balance policies and programs that focus exclusively or predominantly on women both reflect and contribute to the societal prejudice that regards child-rearing and family responsibilities as women’s work. If, as a societal matter or as a business matter, we are serious about improving work/life balance for working parents, I believe there are few more effective things to be done than to make it possible and acceptable for fathers to assume more family responsibilities. Shifting some of the “life” side of the work/life balance calculus from mothers to fathers would, I believe, improve work/life balance on an overall societal basis, enhance the professional status and career advancement of women significantly, improve the quality of life
of fathers, and be better for our children.

How do we make this happen? The first step, obviously, is for employers to have family-friendly policies that are as available to fathers as well as to mothers – such as parental leave, part-time, flex-time, and telecommuting policies. But policies alone are hardly enough. Many employers already have some or all of these policies, which are, for employment law reasons, written to make them as available to men as well as women, to fathers as well as mothers. Why don’t fathers make greater use of family-friendly benefits that are available to them? I think the reasons have to do with societal and workplace pressures and prejudices. Real men do “real” work. Fathers who reduce their professional hours to spend time with their families risk being perceived as less committed, less hard-working, less successful than their counterparts who do not. Fathers who use family-friendly benefits are not likely to be thought of as on the fast track to the executive suite, or as the strongest
candidates for the next promotion. I am confident, though, that if you asked fathers if they would make greater use of family-friendly policies, especially schedule-reduction policies, if they thought they could do so without damage to their careers, the answer would a resounding yes.

What can be done to increase fathers’ use of family-friendly benefits? Nothing will change unless and until management – all levels of management, from the very top to each father’s direct supervisor – embraces and encourages the use of such benefits by fathers. In the first instance, the impetus for change will have to come from the top, from senior managers who recognize and can forcefully make the business case for gender-neutral family-friendly benefits. And ultimately, significant change will depend on senior managers’ willingness to lead by example – not only to permit and encourage the fathers among their direct reports to use family-friendly policies, but for fathers who are senior managers to take advantage of those policies themselves. Only then will it be clear that real men can be real fathers, and real fathers are real men.

It is difficult for me to describe the difference that my unusual parenting experience thirteen years ago has made in my life. The best I can do is to put it this way. My son turns fourteen in two weeks. At an age when many kids are at odds with their parents, he tells me every day that I am the best dad in the world. And he means it. I am convinced that the strength of our relationship today is attributable in some significant measure to the boost my employer gave me when I was just starting out as a dad.
Back to top>>>

Annotated Bibliography

American Bar Association Commission on Billable Hours Report. 2001-2002.

American Bar Association Commission on Women in the Profession (Deborah Rhode) Balanced Lives: Changing the culture of legal practice. September 2001.

Boston Bar Association Task Force on Professional Challenges and Family (Nancer Ballard). Facing the Grail: Confronting the cost of work-family imbalance. June 1999.

Catalyst. Advancing Women in Law Firms: Making, Change. 2002.

The Corporate Counsel Work/Life Report: Better on Balance

Cunningham, Keith. Father Time: Flexible work arrangements and the law firm's failure of the family. Stanford Law Review: April 2001.

Henry, Deborah. The Case for Flex-Time and Part-Time Lawyering: Why it can be a win-win arrangement for lawyers, their families - and law firms and their clients. The Pennsylvania Lawyer: Jan-Feb 2001.

Williams, Joan and Nancy Segal. The New Glass Ceiling: Mothers and Fathers Sue for Discrimination.

Women's Bar Association of Massachusetts. More than Part-time: The effect of reduced hour arrangements on the retention, recruitment, and success of women attorneys in law firms, December 2000.

Back to top>>>

American Bar Association Commission on Billable Hours Report. 2001-2002.

The commission focuses on running a firm more efficiently as well as helping Lawyers lead a more balanced life. This 90-page report provides information from the results of three different studies including an in house questionnaire, a 100 largest law firms in America questionnaire, and an interactive web board with widespread participation and availability. The authors also outline the current system and alternative options for a more balanced solution.
In the first part of the report, the commission gives the history of the billable hour and describes how changes throughout the last century have led to the current state of an entrenched billable hour system. This system, while demanding an irrational number of hours from lawyers, is profitable and simple, so it remains in place. However, the authors outline a variety of alternative billing methods that can be used such as flat/fixed fees, discounting, blended billing rate, contingent fees, and a hybrid-t. They also provide "snapshots" of law organizations that have successfully used alternative billing methods. Despite the fact that there are many alternative billing methods and the billable hour system is flawed, it remains largely in place. Therefore, authors end the report by highlighting some of the best practices they found within this system and provide tips for keeping billable hours under control.

American Bar Association Commission on Women in the Profession (Deborah Rhode).
Balanced Lives: Changing the culture of legal practice. September 2001.

This 68-page document provides an overview of challenges that lawyers seeking more balance often face as well as specific solutions for multi-level change. Some common obstacles include the large billable hour requirement, the gap between younger and older lawyers' expectations, the feared consequences of part time work, the reinforcement of gender assumptions concerning family responsibilities, and salary wars. However, there is some variation within different types of law as far as how much balance is possible.
Public sector and government organizations offer the best policies in exchange for lower pay. In-house legal departments seem to offer more manageable hours, yet a significant number of people who work in-house still report high levels of work-family conflict. The suggested solutions for change include creating more formal policies, offering benefits on a pro rata basis, and assuring part-time status does not impact partnership potential. Individually, balance seekers can move forward by managing time, securing adequate support, setting realistic goals, and cultivating mentors. Finally, the Bar Association can also help facilitate change by setting up a network of flextime lawyers.

Back to Article List>>

Boston Bar Association Task Force on Professional Challenges and Family (Nancer Ballard). Facing the Grail: Confronting the cost of work-family imbalance. June 1999.

This 83-page article outlines the findings of the Task Force on Professional Challenges and Family Needs, including the need for work-family balance and a change in work culture, attrition, and salary structure. The article examines the field of law in regards to work-family balance, the private law firm, and the changing relationship between lawyer and client; it demonstrates the cyclical force of higher costs, higher revenues, and more billable hours.
Specifically regarding work-family balance, the conflict between lawyer prestige and work-family alternatives is discussed, as are the balancing problems felt by both men and women, the negative view of part-time arrangements, the issue of attrition, and conflict between "partner requirements" and the desired flexible work arrangements of students and young lawyers.
The task force outlines eight practices that best demonstrate support for work-family balance in some law firms. These include individualized flexible work-family arrangements, mutual flexibility (flexibility by both the lawyer and the law firm), alternatives to equity partnership, commitment to a culture of awareness (creating an environment where partner's language matches firm's written policies), clarifying expectations (being clear about a firm's expectations for weekend and evening work), bottom-up review of work-family support (when associates are asked to review their supervisors with respect to supervision, training, and feedback), flexible parental and family emergency leaves, and back-up child care facilities.

This 15-page pamphlet begins by listing why law firms need to address women's issues in their firms: demographics (more female law students), turnover, diverse client base (clients now include more women). It then describes the "root causes" for women's different experiences in law firms: in general law firms resist change, they have an up and out career path, sacrifice and commitment are considered necessary requirements for success, law firms rely too heavily on an informal approach to talent management, there is a general belief that "time equals money" which can mean firms value time more than efficiency, there is a tendency to focus on generating new business and to over focus on the revenues not costs involved with new business.
The pamphlet also provides suggestions for making change; create a formal structure to support the initiative, conduct a fact-based assessment of issues facing women, identify the economic imperative in the firm, critically examine all systems that allocate opportunity in the firm (work assignments, evaluations, client meetings, speaking engagements and committee assignments), build people management and performance evaluation skills, create a comprehensive mentoring program, provide coaching to improve business development skills, and implement flexibility policies without penalizing users.

This 55-page report examines the differences in law firms and in-house attorneys regarding the opportunity to balance work and life. It also outlines common factors contributing to the level of difficulty in obtaining a flexible work schedule, and confirms that having more balanced workers benefits firms and companies in a variety of ways. After reporting a number of findings from the research, authors provide the best policy ideas to consider for companies planning on offering more alternative work options. Overall, authors find that in-house environments are more likely to offer flex time options, compressed work-weeks, and job sharing. However, some corporate law firms are also offering flexible options as well. Telecommuting, one the other hand, is less widely used and generally presents more problems in the in-house environment where a 'culture of meetings' may be the norm, and clients expect lawyers to be on-site for consultation without planning. Another factor important in redesigning work is the assumption that clients will not want to work with part time lawyers, findings in this report prove that to be untrue. However, within the field there is the fear of part-time stigma and many stories that depict people being treated differently for the better and for worse after becoming part time employees. In the end, authors urge firms and companies to develop work/life programs that are individualized, fair, and offered to every employee (not just mothers.) They also emphasize to make sure these programs are implemented to their full extent by having leaders at the very top and middle support and model work/life balance.

Cunningham, Keith. Father Time: Flexible work arrangements and the law firm's failure
of the family. Stanford Law Review: April 2001.

In this 19-page law review piece, Cunnigham examined the status of fathers in law firms. He surveyed a population of men that claim work-family balance is their top priority and found a disconnect between family-friendly policy and practice at law firms; the passage of FMLA in 1993 did not succeed in enabling men to work part-time arrangements and part time policies that do exist that generally go unused by men. In turn, when used by women, these policies form a gender inequality within the firm.
Cunningham claims this disconnect happens for two reasons; large law firms have already adopted gender-skewed leave policies and small firms do not qualify under the act. Research shows that if economically feasible, many men would choose to take leave but a survey of large law firms found vast disparities in the leave packages available for men and women in most law firms. The financial barriers are stacked against men when women are offered paid leave and men are forced to go without compensation. In addition, men often need to prove that they are the "primary caregiver" to be awarded leave.
Cunningham outlines the main obstacles faced by lawyers that attempt to pursue a modified work schedule. These include a reputation of uncommitted (the idea that long hours are a proxy for dedication), the demand for constant access (the need for a law firm to always be able to reach you), and questions of fairness (who should be able to receive a change in schedule, what if everyone wanted it?) He does an excellent job of explaining the obstacle and attempting to debunk the myths surrounding them.
Cunningham concludes by outlining a model firm and arguing the economic case for family friendly practices in elite law firms. He provides suggestions for starting this reform; promote part-time workers to partner status, fixed-fee billing and establish a ceiling in the number of billable hours that will be considered for partnership decisions, culture at firms needs to adapt from top-down and leading partners need to actively support associates that choose modified work schedules. Cunningham concludes his paper by arguing the dilemma felt by fathers is complex but solvable.

This is a good 4-page article that clearly demonstrates how men and women face very different expectations around balancing work and family. The journalist examines the firm, Fox Rothschild O'Brien and Frankel, where one of our core group members Lisa Eldridge "made firm history last year when she became the first part-time associate to advance to partnership without having to give up her part time status." Both men and women want to take advantage of this change, this article examines the difference on how they approach things.

Eldridge, Lisa Carney, Deborah Epstein Henry. Cashing In On Part-Time. The Bencher, The Magazine of the American Inns of Court. March/April 2003.

This 4-page article proclaims that the traditional law career leaves little time for outside responsibilities and leisure. As a more diverse group of people enters the law profession, work-life balance is a growing concern. People have begun to work "part-time" schedules to meet the needs of their family life and their career. (Note: In law part-time can still mean up to 40 hours a week.) This article explains how "part-time" solutions could easily be win-win situations for the individual and the law firm in three major ways: the keys to making a part-time schedule work, debunking major myths about economic drawbacks for firms, and explaining the qualitative gains for participating law firms. According to Eldridge and Henry, there are five major components to maintaining a successful part time career: flexibility (from lawyer and firm), communication, contribution (continued involvement on committees and mentoring), compensation (being eligible for the same things as full time workers), and advancement (the opportunity to advance is important for retention.) Also, reduced time schedules make sense economically for law firms, as these schedules work to retain lawyers that would otherwise leave the firm, use fewer resources and less overhead expenses, guarantee clients that they are working to be sure their lawyers are retained, provide more time and opportunity outside of the office for bringing in new business, and allow lawyers to plan inevitable family sickness and other necessities into their flexible schedules rather than having to miss work time unexpectedly. Finally, there are qualitative benefits for law firms that offer reduced time schedules. The option increases employee commitment, efficacy, and loyalty, and it works as a marketing tool for recruitment and public relations. Overall, successful flexible and less than fulltime arrangements can easily be made "win-win" situations for lawyers and their law firms.

Epstein, Cynthia Fuchs, Carroll Seron, Bonnie Oglensky and Robert Sauté, The Part Time Paradox: Time norms, professional life, family, and gender. Routledge: 1999.

Friedman, Stewart, Perry Christensen, and Jessica DeGroot. Work and Life : The End of
the Zero-Sum Game. Harvard Business Review, Nov.-Dec. 1998

This 10-page article highlights progressive changes in management principles that impact work-family balance. An increasing number of managers are realizing that work and personal life are not in competition, they are complementary priorities. These new managers are guided by three principles: 1) be clear about both- business priorities and personal priorities/concerns, 2) understand workers have roles outside of the office as well and must be happy where they overlap- skills transfer from one role to the other, and 3) continue to experiment with the ways work is done while creating time and energy for employee's personal concerns. These principles intertwine and should be practiced together. Managers also have to show their commitments by being a role model. When managers demonstrate their commitment and help employees to balance their lives, the trust, loyalty, energy, and commitment of the employees doubles and everyone involved will benefit, including the organization.

This article does a good job describing what law firms have to gain by supporting flex-time and part time lawyers. The article begins by describing what flex-time or part-time lawyering is (i.e.- part-time law can still mean a 40 hour work week). It then points out that there are a range of reasons people make the changes, but for many, one clear benefit is increased time with family. Next it presents some of the challenges people face when making this change: stigma and a sense that you are less committed, variation in whether a firm will keep you on a partnership track position, the potential of getting less interesting work assignments, and the tendency for workload to creep past part time hours. The article concludes with the reasons employers should cooperate: lower cost of turnover, increase good will from happy employees, maintain client/lawyer relationships, have part-time lawyers advance at the firm to send a signal to clients that the lawyer is worth more, and it is good for recruiting and P/R..

Williams, Joan and Cynthia Calvert. Balanced Hours: Effective Part-Time Policies for
Washington Law Firms: The project for attorney retention, 2001.

In this 52-page document, Williams and Calvert cover the business case for reduced hour schedules for lawyers, current problems faced by lawyers on reduced schedules, and the PAR usability test which rates a firm's policy usability. In their first section, they make the case that law firms need balanced hours to lower stress, effect attrition, and succeed. In the next section, Williams and Calvert measure current part-time policies and programs. They evaluate these programs by using the PAR usability test. It examines 6 components: usage rate (percentage of lawyers taking advantage of the policy), median hours worked and duration of balanced hour schedule (examines whether part-time workers are actually working part-time hours), schedule creep (part-time schedules gradually becoming full-time.), comparison of work assignments, comparative promotion rates, and comparative attrition rates. Overall, they argue that these policies have significant problems. They conclude by making recommendations for more effective balanced hours programs. These recommendations promote a written policy to include proportional pay, benefits, billable hour ratios, bonuses, and advancement possibilities.
In order for successful implementation of a balanced hour policy, the policy needs to be supported and modeled at the top, the policy should be well publicized to all employees at a firm, and basic training needs to occur for lawyers to understand how to develop and supervise a balanced schedule. In the final section, Williams and Calvert debunk several myths regarding balanced hours such as: the high cost, the belief some law practices are not amenable, their inability to work in high-powered law firms, the belief that balanced hour lawyers are not committed, the fear that clients won't accept these schedules, the fear of floodgates, and the idea that balanced hours are not practical for support staff.

Williams, Joan and Nancy Segal. The New Glass Ceiling: Mothers and Fathers Sue for Discrimination.

This report presents legal cases concerning mothers and father fighting discrimination in the workplace. Many specific incidences and outcomes are highlighted that showcase the existence of discrimination in hiring practices, promoting practices, stereotyping, and causing hostile work environments for parents. Such cases show that gender assumptions based in roles that form a separation between work for fathers and home for mothers still strongly exist. This article implies that these assumptions, when held by leaders in organizations, result in systemic inequality and discrimination in the workplace. The assumption of gender roles can be seen in research sited by the authors illustrating "competence assumptions." This research shows that "business women", "business men", and "millionaires" are all rated on the same competency level. However, once women were seen as primarily mothers, their competency was on the same level as "elderly", "blind", "retarded", and "disabled" people. The up side is that parents are really starting to stand up for their rights and challenge unfair actions. In turn, employers are forced to look at these issues to avoid time consuming and expensive lawsuits. Authors stress the need for safe workplace policies and an end to the discrimination for both men and women who choose to play a role as parent as well as worker.

Women's Bar Association of Massachusetts. More than Part-time: The effect of reduced hour arrangements on the retention, recruitment, and success of women attorneys in law firms, December 2000.

In this 50-page document, The Women's Bar Association of Massachusetts examines the effect of reduced hour arrangements on the retention, recruitment, and success of women attorneys in law firms. Since the 1970's, the number of women present in the field of law has continued to rise. However, women are not reaching the same partnership levels as men; they have a high attrition rate. Over 90% of the law firms surveyed offer part-time arrangements, yet this study proves that offering the arrangement is just not enough.
The first section outlines statistics on existing policies for reduced hour arrangements at Massachusetts firms. The article also provides implementation experiences of lawyers searching for balanced solutions. The third section provides further details from the experiences of lawyers who left their firms. Respondents working part-time had left their position for the same three reasons as those respondents currently dissatisfied with their job: lack of support from law firms for reduced hour arrangements, deterioration of professional relationships within the firm, and adverse career consequences. This paper offers a number of recommendations to improve the implementation of part-time policies; have every level of management support the programs, as a firm do not tolerate unequal behavior by other lawyers to those working part time, help develop professional relationships, encourage part time lawyers to contribute to part time policy development.