Karen Hester, The Center for Legal Inclusiveness

Change in diversity depends on outcomes, not just output

Karen Hester and the Center for Legal Inclusiveness have been working on exposing high school students to the legal profession in order to encourage more students from diverse backgrounds to pursue law school. / law week file

LAW WEEK: Can you explain the idea of output versus outcomes in diversity for me?

KAREN HESTER: Basically what happens, at least in my opinion, is those of us in the diversity field, and I’m really talking about myself, we fall into that [mindset], let’s do the activity — the output — let’s have the receptions, have the dinners, let’s have the whatever, so we can feel like we’re doing something. But what does that actually change as far as having more diversity in the profession or having a better retention rate when it comes to underrepresented attorneys? And so that’s what the outcomes are. 


I think for a lot of us, not just those that do diversity work, but I think the legal profession and in any profession that’s concerned about diversity, there is a fatigue when you look at, hey, we’re doing all these activities, but we’re not seeing change on the diversity. And so it’s the output versus the outcomes. And so I think for CLI and for a lot of organizations and employers, I think what you’re going to find is even though they’re going to continue with the activity, I think there’s more focus. More energy is going to be placed on the outcomes because that’s where the change is really going to come in. 

It’s going to take a stronger concerted effort to determine what the goals are and how to get there. And so coming up, all of the affinity bars and even the CBA and DBA are partnering with us to have this diverse judges reception on November 16, and I would consider that an output, right? But one of the ways that we are reaching the outcome, which is to have a more diverse judiciary, is with the Bench Dream Team. 

The Bench Dream Team is an idea that Justice [William] Hood came and said, “Hey, Karen, we want to help get more diverse applicants to apply for the judiciary.” And so we came up with a Bench Dream Team, and it’s chaired by Justice Hood and Justice [Monica] Márquez — well, who else can you ask to do that kind of stuff? 

We have three subcommittees. And what they do is they have one committee that works with law students, just to tell them career-wise, this is an option for them. Then they have one working with young and mid-range attorneys to help them develop the resume, so that when it’s time for them to apply, they have the skills that are needed here. And then they have one where they’re working with people who are ready to apply, whether it’s a mock interview and helping them review their application and things along that line. 

LAW WEEK: So what are some of the other things that are having these positive outcomes?

HESTER: We just did a summer law camp called Journey to J.D. We work with rising high school juniors, and the reason we picked that particular class is they take the standardized test particularly for scholarships like the PSAT their junior year, and if they have parents like mine, you take the ACT and SAT your junior year, so we have a prep course for them. We all know that that’s a barrier, particularly for underrepresented students, so we can help them do better on these tests, which will not only help them with admissions but also scholarships and that’s going to help go to law school. 

That program is basically three parts: In the morning they’re taught basic legal concepts. Then in the afternoon they do field trips. So they met with Justice [Richard] Gabriel on Monday. And then they met with a politician who was still practicing law and they met at a law firm and so they just had a view of the different things you can do with it. So that was the afternoon, and then the evening, they had networking opportunities. And one of the things they really enjoyed was a meeting with the [Colorado Bar Association Leadership Training] leadership group. 

They have the opportunity to talk to about 10 different COBALT attorneys who were from different parts of the state, and different parts of the law talking about quality of life. I mean, it was just eye-opening for them.

One of the things I’m most proud of about it is we had enough sponsors to where we only have to charge students $50 a head for a seat deposit. And really, that’s just to make them have skin in the game. And if students couldn’t afford it, all they have to do is send us an email saying, “Hey, can we waive out?”

So as far as outcomes, it’s a long game that we’re playing here. But if we can get them first of all to graduate from high school and get them to college, and then ultimately get them to law school, that’s going to help our diversity and inclusion. And my goal is to get them to go to law school in the state. I don’t care if they go to undergrad wherever; come back to Colorado, so we can keep them here. 

LAW WEEK: One thing that I’ve been wondering about as I have some of these other conversations is, how do you set meaningful goals in terms of something that’s quantified? Obviously we want things to change. We want things to get better. But how much better? How do you even know what it is attainable that way? 

HESTER: That’s the hard part. Right? You’re quite right for the output. That’s an easy metric. Do you have a mentoring program? Check. Do you host monthly meetings? Check. But when we talk about goals, when we talk about substantive change, what metrics are you talking about? 

It can be something as basic as let’s look at retention. Maybe you track what your attrition rate is, but then you do a deeper dive, are you finding that one particular office or one particular department has a higher attrition rate than another? Or is that particular department? Are they losing more women than maybe other departments? So you have to do a deeper dive, what then? Are you losing them because maybe they got a better opportunity? Or was there something in here within that particular department? So talking with them, talking with other experts, when it comes to evaluation and metrics and things of that nature, how can we measure what should we be measuring?

And for organizations, I think sometimes metrics can be scary. Because what if the results don’t show that something is having an impact? Or you’re moving backwards? And so do you then share that information? So there’s so much to that discussion, but I think it’s necessary for going to make a change, again, we’re looking to output versus outcomes and outcomes. What are the goals, and how are we meeting them for you is absolutely imperative. 

And again, there are folks out there that are doing the work, I don’t necessarily think there as is as much as there could be when it comes to the legal profession. … So there’s some work that needs to be done on that, too. 

— Tony Flesor

Previous articleVanessa Devereaux, Sam Cary Bar Association
Next articleCourt Opinions- Nov 05, 2018

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here