« Involuntary Departures From Law Firms on the Rise | Main | Grammarians Parse the Second Amendment »

The Impact of Children on Lawyer Productivity

Having children impacts lawyer productivity in different ways depending on gender, concludes a recent investigation by the British Psychological Society, reported here. After studying the schedules and billing records of 670 lawyers in Alberta, Canada, researchers Jean Wallace and Marisa Young found that when women lawyers have children, their productivity (or at least hours worked) decreases. The decrease occurs because female lawyers with children usually juggle professional and domestic responsibilities. By contrast, male lawyers with children were found to be more productive than their childless male counterparts, which according to the study " is consistent with the dominant cultural view of men as breadwinners, such that those with greater family responsibilities put in more hours to earn more money." At the same time, male lawyers with children were more likely to have a partner who did not work and could assume responsibility for household duties.

The study also examined the impact of "family friendly" work practices on productivity. Interestingly, the researchers concluded that flexible hours negatively impacted the productivity of male staff, but not female staff. 

So which category of lawyers is most productive? That would be childless female lawyers, whose productivity exceeds that of their childless male counterparts and male and female lawyers with children. 

My biggest gripe with the study is that it uses hours as a proxy for productivity.  But as we all know, hours billed don't necessarily correlate to efficiency; indeed, longer hours may signal less productivity, not more. I'd be curious to see, for example, whether women lawyers manage to complete tasks more quickly precisely because they have less time. If that's the case (and I suspect it is), perhaps having children makes them productive, not less.

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on March 21, 2008 at 02:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

Comments

The sincerest measure of productivity is money. If the lawyer with short hours finishes more tasks, more successfully, the hourly rate increases. So income would answer your question better.

There is also a movement to allow children to be at work. If any woman worked for such an office, her productivity should be analyzed separately.

Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Mar 23, 2008 9:31:34 AM

I was prepared to become outraged about societal gender bias, glass ceilings, and the damned billable hour...but sadly, having my 9-month-old has negatively affected my ability to work.

I can't work when she's sick (because she can't go to daycare), I'm sick, or I'm severely sleep deprived. If my husband is sick, then he can't really watch her or do household chores (or take her to daycare) - so again, I can't work. The only foolproof to work at home is to go somewhere, anywhere else.

How depressing to see this in black and white.

Posted by: Shelley | Mar 24, 2008 2:33:43 PM

Interesting that this post uses the following terms:

women lawyers
female lawyers
male lawyers

but not this term:

man lawyers

Posted by: Mister Thorne | Mar 25, 2008 9:35:22 AM

Hours are a nearly perfect "proxy for productivity" from the legal employer's perspective at least! Law firms are paid by the hour, so within reason law firm associates who work more hours make the firm more money. Of course that's an imperfect proxy for productivity from the client's perspective, but (a) in a world of imperfect options most clients still believe that billing by the hour is the best way to pay their lawyers, and (b) why does the client's perspective matter anyway to the point you are making--which is about the effects of family-friendly policies on the employer (i.e., law firm). Of course the dynamics may be different at a different kind of employer, like a corporate in-house or government legal job where lawyers don't bill by the hour. But that's not a fair criticism of a study explicitly focused on the subset of lawyers that bill by the hour.

Your real point ought to be that the dynamics of billing by the hour (and hence of most of the law firm world) are inherently ill-suited to people (men and women) with young children, because it is harder than in most work settings to deal with the increased demands by just working harder and smarter for the hours you are at work. You can do that, but to some extent you will be under-rewarded / under-appreciated for it because law firms care about billable hours for their own sake (to some extent) in addition to just how much you accomplish. (Giant footnotes on that assertion of course, since good and efficient work is also greatly valued and career-enhancing). But that's just the economics of the business, and no employee has a right to insist that their employer measure them by a completely different standard of productivity than the one that determines the employer's own profits!

By the way, I have had Shelley's experience. Trying to edit a brief or run a conference call while also entertaining a four month old is an interesting experience once or twice, but completely unworkable for very long. There is no way that a young child doesn't impact your productivity, unless someone else is responsible for that kid full time.

And I agree completely with Mister Thorne on the linguistic point. When did "women lawyers" or "first woman President" and the like become proper usage of English? "Woman" is a noun, "female" is an adjective.

Posted by: Scott | Mar 31, 2008 5:42:10 PM

Post a comment