We wanted to produce a special episode of The Geek in Review to discuss the tragedy surrounding the murder of George Floyd and the protests which are going on over the past ten days. While we focus our discussion on the legal industry, the issues are certainly not limited to lawyers and legal professionals. We’ve dedicated the entirety of the episode to this topic.

Just two months ago we had Bryan Parker on the podcast discussing the need to have a better return on investment when it came to legal talent. In the year 2020, two months feels like two years. With the changes resulting from the pandemic, the economy, and now the murder of George Floyd, we asked Bryan to come back and talk with us, and bring along his Legal Innovators business partner and one-time mentor, Jonathan Greenblatt.

In the recent article, What the Death of George Floyd Should Teach the Legal Industry, Bryan Parker (with help from Jon Greenblatt) lays out some internal and external steps that the legal industry can take to contribute to the conversation around race while maintaining a respect for everyone willing to have an honest conversation. There is an enormous amount of privilege and power within the legal community, and those traits should be used to drive real change.

Listen on mobile platforms:  Apple Podcasts | Overcast | Spotify  

One of the first things that Parker and Greenblatt stress that we all must do is to check in on one another. As Bryan says in his article, “[f]or starters, your black colleagues and associates are not alright.” This type of interaction and communication shouldn’t be limited to the current new cycle. And, as the stress of the current environment sinks with everyone, there is a need to monitor the mental health of all of our colleagues.

We hope that this conversation leads to more conversations.

You can reach us anytime by tweeting us at @gebauerm or @glambert. Or, you can call The Geek in Review hotline at 713-487-7270 and leave us a message. You can email us at geekinreviewpodcast@gmail.com.

As always, the great music you hear on the podcast is from Jerry David DeCicca.

Transcript

[00:00:00] Marlene Gebauer: Welcome to a special episode of The Geek in Review. I’m Marlene Gebauer.

[00:00:10] Greg Lambert: And I’m Greg Lambert.

[00:00:11] Marlene Gebauer: We want to acknowledge the sadness we feel for the death of George Floyd and the treatment of protesters and the destruction of property in the wake of his death. There’s hurt and anger and sadness in our country, and also hope to improve what has been a lasting blight on this country. This has framed today’s episode.

[00:00:31] Greg Lambert: Brian Parker of Legal Innovators had recently been on the podcast, and he wrote an article along with his business partner, Jonathan Greenblatt, about the murder of George Floyd and what lessons the legal industry could learn from this tragic and brutal event. So Marlene had reached out to Brian and John to see if we could get them on the show, and we did.

[00:00:46] Marlene Gebauer: Words create worlds, and this episode reflects that. Conversation, legislation, representation. You will hear references to all of these as we sift through the ways to support Black colleagues during this turbulent time and beyond.

[00:01:03] Greg Lambert: So thank you all for taking the time to listen. Two short months ago, Marlene and I talked with Brian Parker about the need to better understand, recruit, and retain the talent within the legal industry. You know, since that time, the pandemic has continued. There’s been 40 million Americans or so that have lost their jobs. And of course, recently, the tragic murder of George Floyd and other significant issues that bring out the ugly truth about race in America back to the forefront.

[00:01:34] Marlene Gebauer: Brian, along with his Legal Innovators co-founder, Jonathan Greenblatt, penned an amazing but sobering article this week on the American Lawyers website entitled, What the Death of George Floyd Should Teach the Legal Industry. Brian and John join us here today to continue that conversation. Brian Parker, John Greenblatt, thank you for writing this article and for speaking with us today. It took a lot of courage to write that piece, and I hope the article has been getting a strong, positive response.

[00:01:57] Jonathan Greenblatt: to write that piece, and I hope the article has been getting a strong positive response.

[00:02:03] Bryan Parker: Yeah, well, we appreciate that. And you, obviously, Marlene, we thank you for forwarding it around and sharing it with some of your colleagues. I think you’ve certainly started that sharing pattern. And I think what John and I talked about, it’s amongst many other really good articles and thought pieces that are out there, has just sparked some good conversation, which is what John and I talk all the time. We think that’s the beginning of what could be the healing here.

[00:02:29] Marlene Gebauer: Before we get into the substance of the article and what lessons we should take away from the current situation, Brian and John, can you tell us a little bit about your relationship and how the two of you managed to lead a company from two different racial lenses?

[00:02:43] Bryan Parker: That’s all right. John, I’ll actually let you go for it. You want to take that one first.

[00:02:47] Jonathan Greenblatt: Sure. Well, the relationship started– so I had founded the Diversity Committee at Sherman and Sterling. My family is a mixed-race family. My wife is African-American. Our kids are biracial. And I’ve had a longstanding interest in diversity and co-founded. in about 1990, thereabouts, maybe it was the late ’80s, early ’90s, the diversity committee at Sherman and Sterling. A lot of the things I think we’ll probably talk about today come out of some observations that were made at that time that are as true today as they were then. But one of them is that all young lawyers need to be mentored. And they certainly benefit from it to the extent a senior person takes an interest in them and helps them learn and not make the mistakes that they made. And that’s probably even more true if you, for whatever reason, feel isolated in the firm or particularly different. And Brian was assigned to the litigation group. As a summer associate I was in the litigation group as a partner then and I started to mentor Brian and was impressed with him even then. Even more impressed when he came back to the firm he decided he wanted to be an M&A lawyer which meant he understood where the money was and so he left the litigation group and joined a group that where he developed some additional mentors. associate. I was in the litigation group as a partner then, and I started to mentor Brian and was impressed with him even then. Even more impressed when he came back to the firm, he decided he wanted to be an M&A lawyer, which meant he understood where the money was. And so he left the litigation group and joined a group where he developed some additional mentors. And we stayed in touch because Brian’s good about staying in touch throughout the time that he, after he left Sherman and went off to go into the first investment banking side, then the business side. Then he contacted me when he was running for the mayor of Oakland. And we caught up when I was in San Francisco on a case. We hadn’t seen one another for a while in person. It was great. I remember coming back and remarking to my wife how it reminded me how close Brian and I had been and how much we liked one another and how smart Brian was. And it also occurred to me that he was very good at raising money because he was able to pry the pen out of my hand to write a check for his campaign, knowing he had zero chance of winning.

[00:05:07] Bryan Parker: We got two donations out of him, though. Linda, too.

[00:05:12] Jonathan Greenblatt: But hoping he did as a good government candidate from the outside taking on the incumbent. And I had had the idea for Legal Innovators in my mind for quite a while. And, you know, I didn’t want to say it then. But when Brian didn’t get elected, I connected up with him and said, you know, you bring a skill set that I don’t have. You’ve run businesses. I have a vision. I have certain credibility in the legal industry. I understand the training, the mentoring and the professional side. But I have no ability to start a business and make a business be successful. And Brian had developed those skills. So I asked him whether he’d be interested in teaming up. And Brian can share with you why he made the ridiculous decision to do that. But but but he did. And, you know, this whole relationship has always been based on honest and open communication between us, because there’s a lot of respect and an understanding of what we each bring to the table and who’s better at what. And we defer to the other person on what that person is better at so that the team succeeds. So anyway, Brian, I’ll let you give the same, go through those facts from your perspective.

[00:06:24] Bryan Parker: No, I mean, look, I think that’s, you hit the stuff on the head and, I know, again, I’ll wait for the questions to unearth some of this. But I think when I sat down and was doing the article and we got to some of the solutions, and this was just a natural outgrowth of everything that John and I have said. I mean, not that there’s off time, right? We’re always talking about business, but sometimes we’ll put sports in there and politics and this and that. And when you get right down to it, this subject of race is a really uncomfortable one on all sides, both for white and for black people. And I think when we got to the other night kind of finalizing things, was, look, you gotta start with a conversation that’s real, that’s based on the type of respect that John talked about, and give permission to people on both sides to just speak their truth, whatever it is. And I think a lot of times, blacks in this country don’t feel hurt. I mean, that this is obvious from the protest, but whites on the other side may say everything from, I don’t know the language to use, to if I bring up a point that I’m thinking about, I get shut down, etc, etc. And so I think we’ve got to have room for what is a really ugly subject and being able to speak to it clearly. got to have room for what is a really ugly subject. And being able to speak, speak to it clearly, because I think unless we embrace it, it’s going to be hard to get beyond people say racism, there was a professor today that wrote up in the Times, I don’t know if you guys saw it. And she said, let’s call it what it is. There’s an anti-black problem in America. That’s a harsh reality. And that’s a harsh statement to, especially for many of us that feel we’re enlightened, progressive, whatever that means, to hold on to. But unless we can try to seek the truth to it, take our egos out of the conversations, and be able to speak truth to power, I’m not exactly sure how we progress. And that’s in any area of life, John, and I obviously are started with a legal profession, because that’s, that’s what we do for a living.

[00:08:26] Jonathan Greenblatt: Yeah, and we’re not going to solve the problems if there’s not honest discussion. And I’m concerned that people are afraid to have them. And we’ve got to create places where people can have a discussion and not be worried about whether what they say will be perceived wrongly or correctly, but that it’s then you don’t get past that point in the discussion, because then people retreat. And, you know, it’s so easy for people to say, this is a really hard subject. And since it doesn’t affect me, if I’m white, day in and day out, you know, why venture out there if I’m going to get hurt in some way by trying. So that’s not to, by the way, in any way blame the victim. I’m simply saying that we’ve got to find a way to be able to have discussions and break down the assumptions, the wrong assumptions that a lot of people, white people make about the facts and they end up saying things that they may not understand, come across a completely different way. But if you have a dialogue, and it’s my kids often in my wife who help me understand this, they educate me to why it is that something I might have been inclined to say comes across a particular way and why it’s insensitive. helped me understand this, they educate me to why it is that something I might have been inclined to say comes across a particular way and why it’s insensitive. And if you’re open to that kind of discussion, then you’ll change your behavior because many of us don’t want to hurt anyone else, but we all need to learn from one another. So Brian and I talk all the time about these subjects in that kind of way.

[00:10:05] Greg Lambert: Yeah, I imagine there’s a combination of anger and defensiveness that really kind of restricts some of the open conversation. So let’s dive in on this and see how it goes. So Brian, I want to get to the article, and I’m going to tell you that the line that you wrote that said, for starters, your black colleagues and associates are not all right. That really punched me in the gut on that one. And because obviously it’s true, but sometimes you got to state something that’s so obvious and say it out loud before you realize that and allow it to sink in. Can you talk about the mental strain that is affecting the black legal community right now?

[00:10:58] Bryan Parker: Yeah, and I’m not so sure, it’s just, so my comments, and you guys are the three legal geeks, right? So we’re talking about legal stuff. But one of my friends said it, sort of said it best, right? Like whether we’re a lawyer, doctor, politician, I’m a lawyer like John, like you guys. When we leave, actually, I was listening to an interview on Malcolm Jenkins. Malcolm Jenkins was speaking from the New Orleans Saints in response to some of the Drew Brees comments, right? And Malcolm is an all-pro safety and makes whatever gazillion bucks, and he deserves it, right? And he works hard and all that. What was saying back to Drew Brees on Drew’s comments, and I don’t want to get involved in trying to further bring Drew down, he’s apologizing. saying back to Drew Brees on Drew’s comments, and, you know, I don’t want to get involved in, you Hopefully, he can be a part of the solution. But Malcolm’s comments, which I think are applicable here was, yes, some of the field on this all pro safety, when I go out into the streets, I’m still a black man. And so I think that’s where we start. And I should say, you know, I use the term man, and I’ll use that, you know, it should be interchangeable with man, woman, right? Women, excuse me, because there are certainly black women. And we see where George Floyd kicked off what I hope will be a lasting moment of change, but he was just the most recent in a litany of black men and black women, right? And so at some point, you come to this boiling point. All that to say, I think it’s a mix of emotions, right? I happen to have a very sensitive and compassionate co-founder, and even his wife and his daughter, who is a PhD in psychology, who, you know, like, hey, you know, check in on you and give you that space, which may not be natural for everybody. But it’s you get up in the morning, and you know, just like you guys are doing your own jobs, right? Like we’re trying to run a startup in a pandemic. So we’ve got a lot of stuff to do, right? Like clients and loans, or whatever we got to do to make sure we stay afloat. But you have the weightiness of this moment on you. And I think in any day, it’s a it’s, I can only say it’s a range of emotions. Sadness, anger, despair, you know, hopelessness, right? All of these things rolled up into one and you you go through seas and crest of the these emotions during, you know, during during the day. And unless you have been in a, or already in an organization, that you feel valued, and you have the space to mentally not be okay. I’ve had lots of friends that I already talked about, John’s role and checking in. Friends, I already talked about John’s role and checking in Monday. I mean, we’ve, again, I don’t want to put our burden above anybody’s, right? But startup pandemic, it’s hard. And Monday, a lot of stuff to do. But I just had to say, look, mentally, I’m used to trying to operate at a very high level of efficiency and had to say, look, on Monday, it’s just okay, right? Like I’m revenue, 50%, 60%, whatever it was, but what can we do? And I guess that’s where my mind turns in terms of a cathartic experience. Part of it was talking to John and some of my other friends that really helped. But the more I sat around and thought about it, I said, look, let me put pen to paper and see if I can get some thoughts out. Originally, it’s just a couple of groups of my friends who we exchanged in some of these chat rooms and text messages and stuff. And then I said, well, maybe we got something larger that could be shared more globally. Globally, at least here in the U.S. and in our legal community. That’s how I got from, you know, how I was feeling and how I was feeling as a proxy for your question of how are folks feeling at these law firms and in the legal community right now. And that range is pronounced, right? And maybe we’re going to get to it, maybe we won’t. The one person I will pause on more than one person. But I think for right now, the example that I would want to put out is the Collins Ford, and I’m sorry, forgetting his last name. But he’s the associate from Pryor Cashman who was charged with his participation in driving a van and incendiary devices and stuff. I don’t think anybody condones that. Do we understand how it can come out of the anger and the frustration? That’s not the right way to do it. And I feel really bad that, you know, he’s put his career in jeopardy that obviously he worked so hard for. I just want to bring that up to understand a point. To bring that up to understand a point and John helped me lay this out. So it was, you know, It wasn’t muddled in the writing, and it was clear. We want to denounce actions like this. But we need to step back and not get lost in the actions on our way to understanding the anger that drove them. And I think, well, Colin Collins took it further than, you know, I guess 99.9% of the people that I know, that real anger and despair. And let me close, let me close this way. It’s something that John’s wife reminded me of the other day, we’re having a conversation. In ’68, you might remember Fannie Lou Hamer, talking about riots and the things that were going on at that time. And she said, you know, because they were asking about the violence and some of that sort of thing. And she says, look, you keep taking away from people who have nothing, treating them like they’re nothing. And then you’re surprised that this violence and this anger can come out. Like, once it’s unleashed, you can’t put cozy definitions on it, because it’s revolutionary. It’s unorganized, but it’s an expression of people who haven’t been heard for too long.

[00:17:01] Greg Lambert: Jonathan, you have anything to add to that?

[00:17:04] Jonathan Greenblatt: Well, I would say that to me, the other half of what Brian was talking about, which was, your colleagues are not all right, is the obligation, I think, to check and see, how are they doing? Because one of the most important things we can do is make sure that people who are feeling like that don’t feel isolated and alone, that they feel supported. And it doesn’t stop there with just statements of support. But Brian, you tell me, I think it’s a place to start. And then what, this is something I’m writing about, is you have to then take it into action. And you have to say, okay, what are the actions I can take now that will last beyond this current crisis when the news cycle moves on to something else? What can I do so that there isn’t, this doesn’t keep happening? But to me, we have an obligation to our colleagues, whether they’re your employees, your peers, your superiors, it doesn’t matter. We have an obligation to our colleagues to find out how are they doing and let them know they’re not alone and they are supported. That there are people who completely are aligned with their interests on this. You can speak, Brian, to the other side of that in terms of hearing that, but to me, it’s required conduct.

[00:18:31] Greg Lambert: I just wanted to jump in real quick here because one of the issues is in normal, with the quotes around at times, we could pull people together in a room. We could walk down the hall and sit in the chair across the desk from someone or take them to coffee and have that personal one-to-one conversation. Right now, we’ve got the added layer of, I’m not seeing my people. Other than, now I got to read the room by reading the emails or the text messages or the instant messages that I’m getting. So, Brian, how are you guys working with your staff that you don’t necessarily get to see and understand what they’re feeling versus what they’re saying?

[00:19:22] Bryan Parker: Yeah. So, I’m going to pick up on where John left off and then go to your question. I mean, the answer is what we’re doing now. Like, Zoom has been a good gift, right? And that’s short of being able to hug people or do some of the nonverbal communications. But it is better than just being on the phone or the text messages, which I think a lot of us defer to. I mean, Marlene and I, and I appreciate her, right? She’s as relentless about her work, I guess, as I am about mine. We’re texting around or not even texting. We’re on Twitter at midnight coordinating this. I definitely thank her for that.

[00:19:58] Greg Lambert: Good job, Marlene.

[00:19:59] Bryan Parker: Yeah. And so, I was listening to a speech this morning from when Baldwin went over to Europe, and there was this whole debate on what was going on with the American Negro. He has this line that talks about to be black in America is to be in a constant state of rage. And I think, you know, maybe before this most recent incident, people have kind of left that to the wayside. And what does that mean? I mean, that is the environmental pressures that happen in poor communities. That is not having fresh fruits in those. That is regardless of you’re somebody that maybe has a little bit of money and privilege to the person that’s kind of scuffling on the street. And that’s what I meant by that line in the story. You are prone for cops to pull you over for, and people say, euphemistically driving while black, right? I mean, it’s you have a nice car, you’ve been profiled. That’s happened to me and so many friends. It produces that rage that Baldwin was talking about. Michael Wilbon, who’s one of my favorite podcasts, obviously behind the three peaks, but on PTI, in ratings as well.

[00:21:12] Jonathan Greenblatt: In ratings as well, I think.

[00:21:14] Bryan Parker: Thanks, John. You see, that’s why we’re so good as partners. So he was talking, and Michael’s got to be, I don’t know what, John, is he early ’60s maybe? I think so, yeah. Yeah, so early ’60s, right? So, I mean, you know, and he’s got dresses impeccably every time I see him. I don’t know what he drives, but I’m sure it’s, you know, at least decently nice. And he was making the point that when he heard sirens in a car pulling up behind him, his heart started beating a little bit faster. And I got to tell you that for many black Americans, when that happens, your whole physiology, it changes. You become anxious. I’m never riding around with anything illegal or any of that. Maybe break the speed limit occasionally. But, and I’ll give credit to John on his lawyer, I’d like to– That’s right.

[00:22:07] Jonathan Greenblatt: His lawyer, I’d like to– That’s right. Spiff on the speeding point.

[00:22:12] Bryan Parker: Strike all those that I didn’t admit. But I think it’s we’ve had to communicate a lot through nonverbal, which has meant more checking in. And I have to say that, unprovoked, right, like, you know, a lot of times, and John is the chairman. And so, you know, I am the day to day. I may say, hey, John, you know, somebody’s birthday or somebody did this and call him on his own. Checked on all of our African American associates to make sure they were okay and give them a chance to just have input and just let them talk. And I have to say, Greg, in response to where you have a group of people, and look, it’s better for some people than it is for others. I don’t want to say like, oh, the whole sky is falling. We’ve got some issues that we need to address. I got an email from one of our investors who’s actually sending over some more money. He’s a lawyer, read through the article, and wasn’t like, oh, this is so well written, great things that lawyers say. I’m sorry for not doing more. Our relationship has been over a phone and email so far. I’m going to pass this along to his partner. I am going to, you know, waiting to meet you and tell me what I can do more. And I just sat back, and in a moment, I said, we’re fluctuating, and we’re thinking about the business and your head is in this, where all of America, the world is with George Floyd right now. That was so touching, just to say, look, I acknowledge that there’s an issue here, telling you that I care about you, whatever words you’re using. And then giving you space to say, reach out for whatever kind of additional support you would need. And the outpouring of that has been, and I think if you ask many, many, many black people in America right now, the outpouring has been substantial. It’s been surprising. It’s been heartwarming. The question is, when the specter of George Floyd’s memorial stops, how do we maintain that? And I’m not expecting somebody to call me up, or certainly John’s not going to call me every Friday and say, Hey, are you okay? How you feel? But how do we address these changes that need to be made systemically and make sure that we are checking? And by the way, at some point, this will settle in and we should be checking on the mental health of all of our employees and friends. But for right now, I think we need to make sure that this change is lasting.

[00:24:46] Marlene Gebauer: So I have to say that, that I took both of your advice in terms of reaching out to people and, you know, reaching out to colleagues, reaching out to friends, just to say, you know, are you okay? Is there anything I can do to support you now? And, and, I mean, even to somebody who I just met very recently in a social situation, and, you know, and that was that was scary because I didn’t know how it would be perceived. And, you know, I have to say it’s been really good and really positive and really engaging in terms of the conversations we had and what, you know, I’ve been able to learn and, you know, hopefully can apply. You know, you mentioned sort of this systemic problem. And I, you know, I listened to another podcast, and it was actually a poet who said this, that basically, you know, we have a cultural and systematic, you know, that racism is ingrained in the system and in our culture. And it’s very important about the next steps that we’re going to take to address that because, you know, we have a very short attention span on, you know, unfortunately, in terms of media. So, in your article, you know, you lay out some practical takeaways on steps we can take to address the situation. You know, so what are some of those actions that we should be thinking about to do?

[00:26:24] Bryan Parker: Yeah, and, and, you know, maybe I’ll, but just so I’m not talking the whole time, maybe I’ll split them up with, with, with, with John. I think we tried to, you know, separate them into internal. So what can you do with your, with your business, or law firm employees? And this is applicable, as I’ve heard from a lot of people more than just in law, right? So if you’re listening, and you’re not a lawyer, great, then, you know, do these things anyway. And then there’s, there’s some external ones. And, you know, just to, to, to front run John’s a little bit. I think, on the external side, there’s lots of personal responsibility and other things that people can do. And John’s going to have things, some things because he’s a lawyer, and so skilled as a litigator. But, but let me– those are the external, I’ll start on the, the, the internal. And we’ve talked about, we’ve talked about one, and that is being aware. What I would compliment big law, corporate America on right now, is the progress, especially as I’ve seen, since I was an associate 20 years ago, is the focus on mental health. Many have chief wellness officers, or maybe they have a wellness manager that’s part of the chief diversity or chief talent officer. Regardless of how you organize it, I think people are a lot more aware of this. And I think the, the checking in, the making sure you’re okay, not passing judgment and not doing something that you’re not trained to do, but then offering up resources to the extent that you do find some, you know, that you do find a challenge. Another is, we’re big data people, right? And I think you talk about racism or something like that, I think it can easily get into, well, this is, this is just feelings and a very qualitative discussion. And for some people that are very numbers oriented, they’re like, okay, that’s fluffy. that’s fluffy. Yes, you know, I’ll buy some tickets, we’ll throw a gala. Let’s look at the data and see what that’s telling us. Why do we have fewer blacks entering the pipeline? Why do we have more as a percentage dropping out? Why don’t we have more going to partner? Let’s match up the numbers that are on the good cases in the litigation sense or good deals in the M&A sense with me. Are they getting that exposure? Are they getting taught how to do business development? So grounding ourselves in the data as we look for these solutions, and then getting to the root cause, I think is something that we can do a better job of. And then I call it leading from both ways. And what does that mean? Well, we lead from the top. And John is a former member of the policy committee over at Sherman, you can say, hey, we got this august group that sits around this table, and they come up with things. There’s lawyers that are smart business people. That’s why they’re at that table. But what I’ve learned in business, and I think it’s a truism here, is that there’s got to be both tops down and bottoms up leadership. It seems antithetical to me that you’re going to try to address a problem, as you see it, and great for taking that first step in addressing the problem, right? But then you’re not going to hear the voices, say you’re trying to do something about diversity, or I’m really looking at the issue of my black associates or partners more closely. You’ve got to take into account what they’re saying, what they think can work, and then coming back with some good measurements. Last thing, I’d love to turn it over to John’s more of the external things. Trainings, if we go to the example of the woman from Franklin Templeton in Central Park that threatened to call, I’m not sure if she was on the phone, I’m not sure if she got through, she was certainly threatening. threatening, and we laughed, she was like, 57-year-old black guy, I can’t think of many more harmless black guys than people that are in the bird, I forget what it’s called, it’s got some name that I only learned by that story, watching birds, but weaponizing this group, and you go back in her history, and she’ll say, oh, I’m a Democrat, I’m liberal, I vote for all these things, but how does she go in an instant to thinking it’s okay to weaponize the police against a black man, and so this role of implicit bias, even for people that have the conscious mindset and say, hey, I’m new age, for lack of a better word, I’m progressive, I’m for the rights of all people, I think it’s just important, and by the way, black people have some of those same implicit biases, so everybody’s got to go through the training, I think if you read Gladwell’s book, Talking to Strangers, he talks about this concept, and I think that’s an important one.

[00:31:10] Jonathan Greenblatt: Well on the last point, and then I’ll go, I think that’s where dialogue and interaction helps, because you can break down, we have to all acknowledge those biases, and we have to correct for them, you have to be sensitive to them and correct for them, and that means you have to be educated, both by training and by talking to people about where your understanding is wrong, and because you won’t necessarily get that because of your biases, and everything you said in the legal profession is harder, but for two reasons, one, it’s a very hierarchical structure, environment in big law, and there is a bit of young people are seen to be, are there to be heard, seen, not heard, like young people at a dinner table, that’s all changing, but it’s sort of you earn your stripes, you get through the gate, That is not a long-term environment that fosters change very quickly. And we need to have change more quickly than we have it. So I think that law firms have to be better at listening to even their most young and junior people in the firm. Putting aside that that’s the future, those people are also in touch with a reality that a lot of people have lost touch with, if they ever had it, as they get more and more senior in a law firm environment. And the second thing is lawyers abhor being touchy-feely, right? They think touchy-feely is for I don’t know what professions, but not the legal profession. I remember before I went to law school, this one person who was a lawyer said to me, you know, when you go to law school, it’s the Marines for your brain. They’re going to sharpen your brain into a pencil, and you’re going to be like a laser pinpoint type of thinker, not some wild-eyed broad thinker like you used to be. And there’s a certain truth to that. I think if you can combine both, you’re a much better lawyer. But in fact, the legal process does train you to zero in on what’s relevant. And you know, early in my marriage, I don’t know that I was beyond objecting on the basis of relevance to things that my family members said, which is pretty obnoxious. And it’s not, doesn’t make for a long-term relationship unless you lose that quick. But because of that, lawyers, they’re not good with touchy-feely. They don’t really know how to do that very well. They think it’s kind of counter to the culture. And I don’t suggest we go all in on touchy-feely, as Brian knows, because I hate it too. But there is a need to find out how your colleagues are doing, and to listen to what they say, and try to help correct for whatever, you know, you need to be responsive. And that’s something law firms are getting better at, but they’ve had to come a ways to get there. come a ways to get there. Well, so I’ve broken down my own personal, like, action list into things I can do as a lawyer, and things I can do as a citizen. As a lawyer, I think what Brian and I need to do is fight harder to open pathways into the legal profession for more young black lawyers, and, you know, we are trying to do that with legal innovators, but I think we’re going to have to dig deeper, and be broader thinking, and go even earlier in the cycle of a student, and maybe try to get to people in high school and junior high, and start talking about the law in a way that at least in some environments they may not be exposed to, so we can start to, because part of the problem here is that the pool of people coming in isn’t that large, and we need to expand the size of the pool, putting aside all the other things that happens once the pool actually gets into a law firm. I think I need to take on another pro bono project on a social justice type issue. I do some, and I think I need to do another one, and that’s kind of a to- do list item for me, and I want to educate myself more on what kinds of legal, legislative, educational information there is on the police brutality against black Americans, and that’s not, I’m not in any way trying to tar all police officers, because that’s not what I believe, but I also believe that it’s happened way too often, and there, it seems to be extremely difficult to accomplish change, and I want to try to understand what I can do to get more knowledgeable about how we might contribute to making change in this area, in that specific area. Now, as a citizen, you know, we talk about reaching out to everybody you can think of to show support, but listen in those conversations as to what the people are saying that would be supportive. Don’t just make the call. Listen. You know, I want to volunteer in some activity that brings me in touch with the types of environments that most of us try to avoid in life, you know, the most difficult, disadvantaged areas, because it’s easy to write a check, and that’s important, but it’s harder to come to grips with the actual difficult issue that you aren’t living in your own life, and I think it’s incumbent on us if we’re going to try to have more empathy and understanding to actually see and understand better what people are going through, and then, given my particular family circumstance, I want to try to find a way to have our family open up a dialogue, because we can talk to one another in a way that all of us feel safe and try to expand that into a broader network, so I’ve been thinking a lot about the things I can do so that when this does leave the life, the news cycle, we’ve got some enduring actions that hopefully make a difference if enough of us do them.

[00:37:52] Marlene Gebauer: Actually, a really interesting idea in terms of understanding sort of safe discussion and how to do that, because again, I think that there’s a lot of people, and we’ve talked about it, that are very nervous about doing that, and you seem to be in a unique position to be able to think about that and educate others in that regard.

[00:38:15] Jonathan Greenblatt: We have those discussions around the dinner table, on long drives, heart-to-hearts with one another, and, you know, and my kids are not afraid to call me short on issues that they think I’m not sensitive enough to, and they don’t think I’m listening, but I’m listening to them and trying to internalize that so I can be better and understand it from a different perspective that I didn’t live. So, but I want to understand and be able to address, particularly because, you know, as a person who ultimately acquired a relative degree of privilege, those are the people that can make a difference if they actually try to do it and stay with it.

[00:38:58] Bryan Parker: that can make a difference if they actually try to do it and stay with it.

[00:39:05] Greg Lambert: Well, speaking of privilege, in your article, Brian, you’d mentioned that the underlying theme that you suggested in the external actions that John had covered, that we have an amazing amount of privilege in the legal community to actually drive some change. So what is it that you think we should be doing with that power and privilege?

[00:39:26] Bryan Parker: Well, you know, look, I think it starts with actions. So I won’t repeat a lot of what John said, but it’s for a lot of people that have that privilege, right? Like they know a me, right? Or they know somebody who’s actually smarter than me at their firms or whatever. And so they say, whoa, like, and I think it’s expanding that understanding out to say it’s like that’s not the only Black person that’s good or smart or doing something. So I think there’s an education and once that is there, the privilege can be used in all kinds of ways, right? So John talked about money. Two of the initiatives that both of us really like are the Equal Justice Initiative, which is led by Bryan Stevenson, who was a professor at NYU when I was there, and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, who’s led by Sherrilyn Ifill, who is also, like me, a NYU and super accomplished NYU graduate. So helping those people have the funds so that they can do this important work, I think is something that’s certainly out there. Now, the other one is a little bit controversial, but we try to strip away some of the controversy around it and say, let’s forget about Republican and Democrats, right? Like, so we know that we have people in both parties under these same firms and people that enjoy privilege. people that enjoy privilege. That means that on both sides of the aisle, by the way, which is how our system should work, we can get headway on laws and rules and regulations that matter. So, if we’re saying, as John said, that these police incidents are happening too much, and even if you looked in the case of the officer that did the execution of George Floyd, it’s 17 complaints against them. Why is an individual like that still on the force? And so, these police commission review boards, Congressman Jeffries from New York, who was also at law school with me, putting out federal regulation on ending the use of the chokehold. We’ve known that for 20 years. Why the heck are we still doing that? So, can you influence regulation if it’s a case of an officer-involved shooting? We know what the stats are when it’s left to the local DA versus a special prosecutor versus going to a grand jury. Can we have the law mirror the justice that was at the root of its intent? Influencing the law so that it’s applied equally, those are policy things. And I think then we can move beyond the labels of Republican, Democrat, or people that are libertarian or independent and just say, look, we just want to flatten this out and have justice applied across the board. And that obviously would extend to the system of mass incarceration, which on the GOP side, even the current administration, it’s in there. This is a problem. We need to recognize that. So, how do you bring your voice and your privilege to bear?

[00:42:51] Greg Lambert: Yeah, before I go on, I just want to say, that’s a hell of an NYU class you were in.

[00:42:57] Bryan Parker: Well, so Sherrilyn was before. Again, we follow in big footsteps, but look, that’s the purpose, right? You want to be inspired. I certainly haven’t made one-tenth the contribution that she’s made, but the point of holding up the Equal Justice Society, or initiative, excuse me, or the work that she does on legal defense fund, who are going after voting rights and fractions, who are going after voting rights infractions, who are going after criminal justice reform. We’ve got to be behind those champions that are doing that as the basis of their daily work, because all of us, which is worthy work, are working for profit. We’ve got to be behind those champions that are doing that as the basis of their daily work, because all of us, which is where they work, are working for profit. And then we do, like John said, we’ll do pro bono, we’ll write checks, And then we do, like John said, we’ll do pro bono. We’ll write checks. we’ll get involved after. We’ll get involved after. But these are warriors that are in the trenches, and we’ve got to support them where we can’t always be there beside them. them where we can always be there beside them. Yeah.

[00:43:49] Greg Lambert: So while Marlene was DMing with you on Twitter, trying to get this thing set up, when she told me we had you and John on, I actually reached out to a group of lawyers that are on my diversity and inclusion committee. And I actually had an associate who’s just now finishing up her first year reach back out to me and she said, look, I’ve got some questions I’d love to hear some answers to. So I’m going to throw these out here. So I’m going to throw these out here.

[00:44:21] Bryan Parker: What kind of podcast do you run in here where you’re doing some research outside of it? What kind of podcast do you run in here where you’re doing some research outside of it? That’s like lawyer training to me.

[00:44:29] Greg Lambert: Well, I don’t know if shooting a mass e-mail to everybody’s research, but you know, hey.

[00:44:32] Bryan Parker: You took a step. You took a step.

[00:44:37] Marlene Gebauer: You are talking to research librarians.

[00:44:40] Bryan Parker: Yeah, that is true. I was trying to bring that out. We appreciate it.

[00:44:45] Greg Lambert: So the first thing she asked was, she wanted to hear more about how law firms can enable and support attorneys to actually get involved in social justice initiatives.

[00:44:52] Bryan Parker: I think I’ve got an answer on that. I think I got an answer on that. I’d love to– just given that John’s experience co-founding the diversity committee at Sherman, maybe he can speak from an institutional perspective, and then I’ve got a thought that I would add on there.

[00:45:07] Jonathan Greenblatt: perspective. And then I’ve got, you know, maybe a thought that I would add on there.

[00:45:12] Greg Lambert: All right, John.

[00:45:13] Jonathan Greenblatt: Well, I was going to say, I mean, some of it has to do with the culture of the firm, right? At Sherman, we’re very good about allowing associates to actually be the initiators of some of the landmark cases that we were willing to take on on a pro bono basis. That’s not to say the burden should fall on them, but I’m saying that, I mean, because we have a pro bono coordinator who’s out there looking for interesting and important cases, and not just cases, but work as well. But for example, we represented Shannon Faulkner, who integrated from a gender basis, the Citadel Military Institute, Military College in South Carolina. And it was probably in the early 90s would be my guess. If I remember correctly, and that was groundbreaking. I mean, she was a real trailblazer, and there was tremendous resistance. That case started, I was actually on the pro bono committee at the time. And I remember this associate coming to me, she knew I was, you know, sympathetic to trying to find landmark type cases for the pro bono, for our pro bono work. And she described the case to me. And I said, well, I’m definitely voting for that and supporting it because this case is going to end up in the Supreme Court. And it did. And I only worked on it peripherally. I was on the case, but they were, she drove it. Another partner was much more active on it than I was. But I stayed involved. I interviewed Shannon when we first talked to her about being a client, went down to South Carolina to talk to her. And it was a big burden for an 18 year old to take on. Culture of the firm permits the associates to generate initiatives, that’s one way. The other thing is there are likely to be organizations that the law firms already have relationships with. And either through partners, or through other cases or matters that you’ve worked on, board memberships on nonprofits, etc, that put you in touch with them. But there’s a list of these organizations that are committed to social justice. And, you know, they rarely turn down pro bono assistance. It’s structured, they may not want one individual lawyer, they may want a team. But you know, the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, which I used to be on the executive committee of the Legal Defense Fund, which does a lot of their litigation alone, but will team up from time to time with law firms, and dozens of others that, you know, the DC Lawyers Committee, or the New York Lawyers Committee, or there’s a lot of different committees out there, depending on your interests that are social justice oriented, that you can get involved in. You just have to figure out in your firm culture, what’s permitted.

[00:48:18] Marlene Gebauer: I just I wanted to expand on the question and basically say it’s like, we’re talking about attorneys, what about other legal professionals? What can they do? Or how can they support the firm’s initiatives?

[00:48:30] Bryan Parker: Yeah, I would take, you know, a couple of stabs. I mean, obviously, you know, folks can we go back to the resources, right? It costs a lot of money to run some of these things. And back to John’s point, you know, that’s top down leadership that associates may be able to influence. But things are changing in the law, as John was saying a minute ago about it used to be earn your stripes, then you get to talk. I think associates are coming in with more verve than ever before. coming in with more verve than ever before. And so think about cases that will put the firm in a positive light. Think about getting together with people and making the specific advocacy case to the firm to either expand in those areas or expand with the client in that. I think it can be easy to say, we’ve got this pro bono process. this is the stuff that comes out of it, I’ll just take one, but to influence it both ways in my mind. In terms of other professions, because we overlap with some of the work that we do, there is tax preparation, there’s work at the bankruptcy court. To be frank, if we’re going to move outside of this area of the law, of what can you do to impact the challenge? We’ve got law as one, we’ve got education and economic opportunity as another two pillars, right? And so if you’re talking about getting acquainted with the process on the ground, educating around voting rights, it’s going and being a tutor for four years. helped coach an inner city that was the worst school in our area, well, academically performing in our area, and the most under-resourced one, coached football. Why was that? Yes, I loved football, used to play. Not the point. You get people to focus more on their schoolwork because they had to sign a contract as well as their parents had to sign a contract saying you’re only going to play if you have a certain grade point average, if you show up for these team meetings and that sort of thing. So economic opportunities, if you were. God, it was, I’m forgetting who the A.D. was, but at Cal, which is my undergrad, we were noticing from the data that… Cal, which is, which is my undergrad, we were noticing from the, from the data the football players who were generating a disproportionate amount of income for the university, those that didn’t go off and become pro, weren’t getting the type of jobs that, by and large, the average student that was getting out of the University of California was getting. Well, why was that? Some of the reasoning came down to, You’re busy. You’re going to one of the top universities in the world, and you’re a Division I athlete. Do you have the time for networking, the internships? There’s all kinds of prohibitions about what you’re not able to do while you’re in school. So we instituted an internship and mentor program. Or the mentors came to the football team. And last year before I moved out here with John, we had 50 companies that were there to offer these internships for the summer. So the players didn’t have to go out and do the interviewing. Well, you learn how to network, you learn how to be in a professional environment, by the way. You’re getting this cross-cultural knowledge of each other. And so now they’re coming out. If you don’t go pro, which is the vast majority of athletes of any school, you’ve got a career to kind of get into. So I think there’s all kinds of things that people can do that are not related to law to make a difference.

[00:52:17] Jonathan Greenblatt: Well, and the other thing is, I think in-kind contributions are really valuable, right? So let’s say you’re an IT person. Most of these non-NGO, nonprofit organizations are struggling for dollars. You can provide IT support to them in a way where they don’t have to have an expensive IT function. That helps them because they can put the dollars they would spend on that to something else. If you’re a human resource person and you want to devote some of your time to their human resource issues, you know, all those things are actually important contributions that you can make to nonprofit organizations that helps them function, focus on what their underlying mission is. So there’s a lot of different things. Plus, you know, we talk a lot about litigation. And when I was on the pro bono committee, I was always trying to figure out, well, how do we get the corporate lawyers as involved as the litigators are? Because a lot of them wanted to do more pro bono work, but they were struggling to find projects. Well, two things that occurred to me. One is there are projects out there where people need taxes. I mean, you don’t get too many nonprofits looking to do an M&A deal, but they have tax issues often, or they have real estate issues. They have leases to be negotiated, and sometimes they need to raise money. And I mean, they always need to raise money, but sometimes they may need to raise money in a way where a lawyer can be helpful. And you know, with that, sometimes they need to get a line of credit and they need a lawyer who can do who has bank finance experience. credit, and they need a lawyer who has bank finance experience. And then, finally, I was pushing at one point, because the lawyers committee model is that, you know, it’s got a staff that finds matters and oversees the matters, but the cases are staffed by their membership, which is a lot of big law firms, and it was called to arms by President Kennedy in 1963 when he said to the head, he and Bobby Kennedy said to the heads of many, many law firms in New York and DC and Philadelphia, look, the lawyers down south that are fighting the civil rights battles need some help, and I expect you or want you to lend your forces. And so, most of the big firms signed up, became members of the lawyers committee, and they staffed the matters with their attorneys. Well, at some point, litigation isn’t the answer to all social problems. You know, we need to push the envelope with litigation, but there’s a lot of money and opportunity that needs to be moved that doesn’t depend on litigation. That’s where corporate lawyers, investment bankers, and commercial bankers could actually bring their skill set to bear. So I was trying to get the Justice Department actually interested in the Clinton administration, interested in creating an equivalent lawyers committee only for investment bankers, commercial bankers, and corporate lawyers. It’s a matter of sort of thinking outside the box if you’re in an area where the cases just don’t come in over the transom, but there’s plenty of need, that’s for sure.

[00:55:45] Greg Lambert: Yeah. Well, I think you answered the second question she had, which was, this doesn’t necessarily have to be a litigation, criminal defense, or a civil rights issue in order for it to need action. So I’ll skip to the final one, which I think, again, will resonate with the current situation. She said that oftentimes there’s a heavy weight on minority attorneys to give back to their respective communities. So how can minority attorneys balance trying to learn and grow in the first years of their practice with giving back in a meaningful way, but at the same time, not feeling the burnout of overworking ourselves both mentally and emotionally?

[00:56:31] Bryan Parker: You know, it’s a real issue, right? And when you think about being, you know, one, it’s an incredible opportunity. And I feel, you know, super grateful to have worked at Sherman. It’s just given skill sets, it’s opened doors, all of those kinds of things, right? And I think when you find yourself in that pantheon, maybe there’s a better word for that, that, you know, you’ve got students that want to talk to you, how did you get there? As you get more senior, you know, you’re expected to mentor downward in that sort of thing. And so I guess I go, for me, I go back to, well, there’s probably two things, there’s an internal and an external answer to this. The internal one, and somebody asked Oprah this, right? to be Oprah, but you know, we can we can think along these lines. She says, different version of your question, but can we have it all? Maybe personal life, work, family, love, all this kind of stuff. And she says, yes. But you just can’t have it at once. And so I think for young associates, and I’m assuming that’s from someone that’s sort of rising in the ranks, it’s keeping your priorities together, right? And so the first part of your career, and John and I talked about this a lot, personality and business development, all those things and doing the extra help when you’re on the rise or when you’re considering for partnership because it’s competency plus, this plus. When you’re a junior associate and you’re fighting to make sure that you’re seen in a positive light, that you’re getting on the right matters that are going to elevate your skills and elevate you within the firm, you’ve got to get your head down. So just giving yourself the permission to say, look, maybe I’m going to take on one thing outside the firm, I’m going to do that well, knowing that the disproportionate amount of my energy is going to the firm, and I still have to go and exercise to keep myself physically and mentally fit and those sort of things, so that may be it. And then the companion piece is that this is the flip side of what I was trying to talk or what we were trying to talk about of the top down and the bottoms up, and looking at your associates and saying, are you mentally okay? Associates and saying, Are you mentally okay, I think, John, John makes a great point. And a lot of this is going to be the psychology of whatever individual firm that it is. But a recognition that there may be more challenges and more things pulling at a minority associate than they are of general people. And not to let them off the hook, you paid a handsome salary, you’re there to work and all those sort of things. But if you want that person to mentor, if you want that person to do things in the community, if you want that person to help you recruit and keep your pipeline going, there’s going to have to be some acknowledgement of that and some accommodation. So that you don’t burn out, right? Because after all, this is no different from, you know, the draft of any sports team. We’ve identified somebody that we think one day could contribute to the firm, to our clients, meaningfully to revenue, and maybe one day it’s as partner. So it actually works against your best interest, if you’re not accounting for all these things and burning a person out. So I’d say that to, you know, to the person answering that question. I think it’s a little bit about what you’re bringing to the table, but hopefully you’ve chosen the right environment. And then the leadership of the firm helping you as well.

[01:00:03] Jonathan Greenblatt: Well, I mean, can I just pick up on that? When I was very involved in recruiting and hiring minority attorneys, one of the things we did was we created a scholarship. with the legal defense fund. That’s actually where I developed the relationship with Sherrilyn Eiffel, who we mentioned earlier, which I still cherish, and we’re still friendly. She was on the committee that, along with me, would pick the scholars. And one of the things I noted from that and other recruiting I was doing outside of the scholarship program was this extra burden that black associates felt on two levels, really. One was coming to a firm selling out in some way and two, were they giving back enough soon enough? And I felt it was a horribly unfair extra burden for them to have to carry as very young lawyers compared to their peers who weren’t feeling either of those things, by and large. Not none of them, but many of them were not feeling either of those two things. And I think it’s incumbent on a firm to recognize that that’s the reality. And mentorship can help people understand how they can get that balance right. And for me, when I felt like, gee, should I go to a law firm and sell out? Don’t forget I went to law school in the 70s, right? The late 70s. So there was corporate America wasn’t too popular in those days. It wasn’t selling. You know, the way I rationalized it, I hope it wasn’t just a rationalization, was, well, someday you get to a point where you can give back a lot more. You have to take the long view, right? And, you know, I’d like to think that I’ve tried to get that balance throughout the course of my career and not forget it. But I understand that, particularly, you know, black attorneys feel this pull and this burden. And I think it’s got to be recognized, addressed, allowed. And we have to get to a place where people can get the balance that Brian was talking about right. get the balance that Brian was talking about right. And that really requires people to be looking out for you in the firm, as you navigate through this extra layer of complexity that some people just don’t have. They may have other complexity. And they may, you know, I don’t mean to say other people don’t have their own issues. But this is one that over the years I’ve noticed is being taken on by minority attorneys to a higher degree than non-minority attorneys.

[01:02:43] Marlene Gebauer: So I want to shift the conversation a little bit to diversity and inclusion programs. So, we’ve seen a visible increase in diversity inclusion programs and policies within law firms over the past decade, probably longer. With the current issues of the pandemic, the economic crisis, and racial tensions, are there new opportunities to combat racism and to support diversity inclusion in law firms?

[01:03:11] Bryan Parker: Well, I mean, I guess I’ll maybe take a short crack at this. Maybe, right? We are, and Marlene, I’ve shared this with you, Greg, I haven’t had a chance to share with you yet, Legal Innovators and John and I and our whole team bringing together a webinar on diversity inclusion at the end of the month on the 30th. And the angle that we want to take is to say, how do you view cost- cutting focus on profits that is just happening in this environment with diversity inclusion? So, Marlene, what I said, it depends, is I think our first thing is we want to make sure that we’re not losing the gains that we’ve made. There’s been some wonderful work that’s done. There have been investments that have been made. More folks, I think we’re seeing, you know, starting to come in. But we look, again, we go back to data, and the folks at Parker Analytics are going to be on the phone. and they helped shape this very well. If you look at ’08 or ’09, the real estate crash and what happened, you had a number, you were starting to make some real good progress on the diversity and inclusion. And then people said, like, you know, the work is drying up. I mean, it was a bad situation. I don’t want to underplay it. Like, I was panicked, along with everybody else. But what happened is that you got a lot of junior talent in right at the period before the crash. And people said almost indiscriminately, look, we’ll just lay out this percentage of years one through four. And that happened to disproportionately hit hard the diverse folks, black and otherwise, and women. It took three or four years after the crisis had gone by to try to make some of those gains back. What we’ve seen from general counsel saying, look, more and more, if you don’t have a team that represents diversity, you’re not getting hired. So the point that we want to make is diversity is not only the good and the moral thing to do, it makes business sense as well. So how do we marry those two things? And then Marlene, to your point, how do we come out with actionable steps that people can take? Yes, cost cutting is going to be a part of the equation, but how do we make sure that that’s done with purpose and to lift up the intent of these diversity inclusions, and that we’re not losing the ground? And then as the economy comes back, hopefully, we’re able to put more in. But I think we’re at a critical point. And when John and I have the chance to sit down and talk to the law firms, as we do, and people are in varying places, but I think there’s an openness to look at that. One of the reporters from The American Lawyer that I spoke to yesterday said, well, it’s like, OK, well, that I spoke to yesterday, said, well, it’s like, okay, well, it was always important. Now, with the specter of Joyce Floyd, and the death and everything that’s gone on, there’ll be more of a lens looking at this. Hopefully, people will say, okay, that’s a proxy for accountability. Because what I pointed out to him, is law firms are different than public corporations, right? There’s not going to be an earnings call at the end of the quarter where you can say, how much did you spend on diversity and inclusion? Why did you cut this? And why aren’t you investing there? But I think it gives us a moment to pause and make sure that we don’t go back the other way, and keep making the progress.

[01:06:44] Jonathan Greenblatt: I think it comes down to putting your money where your mouth is. If law firms are going to preach this, and we were both concerned and writing about how important it was that during a pandemic or any economic downturn, as Brian said, that the first thing to go isn’t one of these so-called feel-good things like diversity, because the bottom line is impacted. Number one, I think the bottom line for the reasons Brian said is impacted if you cut diversity, and good for the corporations that are requiring that and pushing it. But secondly, the problems that need to be solved, if you just look at COVID-19, that is not a local problem. That’s a global problem that has affected everyone in the world. And you can’t solve problems like that without diverse viewpoints and perspectives and the different ways of learning and looking at problems. So if we want to be effective, we have to. But I do think, as Brian said, that the focus that’s been placed on combating racism as an outgrowth of the horrible George Floyd murder is going to make it even more incumbent. on law firms not to give up ground game. And at the end of the day, lawyers tend to be progressive thinkers about things like equal opportunity and social justice, whatever their politics are. They tend to be open-minded about those things. That’s why many people went to law school. And if we aren’t going to do it, what profession is going to? I think it’s really morally backwards that it’s our corporate clients that are telling us we have to do it. We should be doing it because we should be doing it. But if it takes the corporations to tell us as a profession we need to do it, then so be it. And it’s going to take creativity. It’s not that a lot of law firms haven’t tried. It’s that they aren’t trying hard enough and creatively enough. And everybody’s got to think out of the box and make a commitment to it and stick to it. That takes leadership. The leaders of the firm have to stick with it in good times and bad and say, this is part of our culture. This is part of our mission. And if it means we’re returning X dollars less at the end of a quarter, which I don’t think it does, but if it did, if that’s the concern, then that’s what it means. We’re not giving up ground on it.

[01:09:22] Bryan Parker: We’re not going to waver. I want to leave a serious point because people are saying, where do we go from here? And I think there’s a lot of bleakness and a lot of lack of hope. And I think we’ve got to put it back on to, yes, we can wallow in that. But how do we move this forward into something? And I was going back and forth. So I’m alternating between being a Baptist and a member of the AME church. But this comes from a rabbi friend of mine who we talk a lot. And he sort of reminded me of something that was in the 30th Psalms. And you guys may remember. not remember, but they’re focused on that. There may be darkness at night, but there’ll be joy in the morning, right? There’s a lot that needs to happen over that. And one of the black and white photos that I have framed in my hallway with low quotes, AP photo, Frederick Douglass. And I think he talks about this and this is going to be a specific call to action back to the blunt talk that John is talking about. But I really think that this is where we are. Imagine he is talking in the late 1800s and here we are right now, but change the word Negro to black and the quote still applies. So he says to us, there is no Negro problem. The problem is whether American people have loyalty enough, honored enough, patriotism enough to live up to their own constitution. We Negroes, again, insert the name black and most people don’t use that anymore. Love our country. We fought for it. We ask only to be treated as those who fought against. I think that’s where we are. And I think there’s a specific call and we’ve got to look into each other’s eyes and make sure, especially as some of us, and I have my grandfather’s black who served in the Navy, go to these things of patriotism and make sure that it looks across all the aisles and treats everybody fairly.

[01:11:34] Greg Lambert: Well, Jonathan Greenblatt and Brian Parker from Legal Innovators, I appreciate you both coming in and having this conversation with us.

[01:11:42] Marlene Gebauer: Thank you very much.

[01:11:43] Bryan Parker: Well, we’re very appreciative as well.

[01:11:45] Jonathan Greenblatt: Thank you.

[01:11:46] Bryan Parker: Be safe, guys.