New legislation, noteworthy transactions and news from the firms themselves. One email a week; unsubscribe from any issue.
International Bar Association
Claudia Barrero and Mariana Estradé discuss how to measure progress on diversity in the legal profession at IBA Copenhagen 2026
Claudia Barrero of Philippi Prietocarrizosa Ferrero DU & Uría (Colombia) and Mariana Estradé of Hughes & Hughes (Uruguay) took part in a discussion during the International Bar Association (IBA) annual conference in Copenhagen on the need to measure real progress on diversity and inclusion in the legal profession.
Danny Rifaat, Sophie Maes, Mariana Estradé, Gine Maltha Kampmann, Claudia Barrero and Kirsty Brimelow, from left to right, during the panel on measuring diversity and inclusion at the IBA Annual Conference, Copenhagen 2026
The International Bar Association (IBA) devoted one of the sessions at its 2026 annual conference in Copenhagen to an issue of growing importance for law firm management: how to measure real progress on diversity and inclusion and ensure that commitments translate into tangible results.
The panel, titled Measuring what matters: data, metrics and accountability in diversity and inclusion, was moderated by Mariana Estradé, of Hughes & Hughes (Uruguay), and Claudia Barrero, of Philippi Prietocarrizosa Ferrero DU & Uría (Colombia). They framed the discussion around the need to move beyond statements of principle and develop measurement systems capable of identifying structural inequalities.
In her opening remarks, Mariana Estradé posed a fundamental question: how can organisations know whether they are making real progress on diversity?
Estradé noted that firms and professional organisations frequently talk about diversity, inclusion, institutional commitments, policies and targets, but said it was essential to establish mechanisms for checking whether those initiatives deliver tangible progress.
The Uruguayan lawyer highlighted significant challenges in collecting and measuring data, particularly because of legal restrictions, privacy protections and cultural differences across jurisdictions.
Claudia Barrero, for her part, helped structure a discussion that brought together experience from different jurisdictions and measurement models. Her contribution introduced perspectives from legal professionals and researchers specialising in equality, with the aim of examining how organisations can use verifiable information without compromising individuals’ confidentiality.
The two moderators steered the discussion towards a central question: it is not enough to know an organisation’s composition; it is also necessary to understand the real career development opportunities available to those who work there.
The UK experience: the pay gap starts before motherhood
One of the most significant contributions came from Kirsty Brimelow KC, representing the Bar Council of England and Wales, who explained how systematic data collection has helped identify persistent inequalities in the UK legal profession.
According to figures presented at the session, women barristers in the early stages of their careers earn approximately 76% of the income of their male counterparts at an equivalent level. Among King’s Counsel, the figure is around 72%.
Brimelow said these differences begin to emerge in the first three years of practice, before motherhood can explain much of the divergence in career trajectories.
The finding challenges one of the most common explanations for the gender pay gap in the legal sector.
The specialist also warned that measuring income alone can give an incomplete picture of inequality.
Two lawyers may receive similar pay yet have access to matters of different economic significance or very different career progression opportunities.
In this respect, she explained that women may receive a higher proportion of work in family law or publicly funded legal services, while certain higher-paid commercial litigation and financial fraud work tends to be concentrated among other profiles.
For the Bar Council, it is essential to combine pay data, information on career progression and surveys on the work experience.
Denmark: many women at the start of their careers, few in leadership
Gine Maltha Kampmann, chief executive of EQUALIS, presented the experience of the Danish organisation, which specialises in research on gender equality and diversity in the labour market.
Kampmann explained that EQUALIS works to replace debates based solely on perceptions and individual experiences with research grounded in data.
In collaboration with the Danish association of law firms, the organisation developed a set of indicators to analyse the representation of men and women at different stages of the legal profession.
The findings show a pattern repeated in many markets: women have a significant presence at the early stages of their careers, but their representation declines steadily towards equity partner positions.
This phenomenon, known as the leaking pipeline, shows that the barriers do not necessarily lie in entering the profession, but in the conditions that determine retention and progression to senior levels.
Kampmann also highlighted the gap between formal rights and their actual use.
As an example, she said that although Denmark offers extensive paid parental leave to men and women, men take considerably fewer weeks on average than women.
According to the figures presented, men take approximately nine weeks, despite a framework that allows up to 24 weeks of paid leave.
The specialist stressed that organisations must analyse not only their policies, but also how they are applied in practice and what effect they have on careers.
Data protection as a limit on measuring diversity
Sophie Maes, partner at Claeys & Engels (Belgium), examined the legal and cultural challenges international organisations face when trying to collect diversity data.
Maes explained that there is no universal definition of diversity data, since protected characteristics and the categories that can be measured vary considerably across jurisdictions.
While some countries allow the collection of information on ethnic origin, others impose particularly strict restrictions.
In Europe, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) sets strict conditions for processing special categories of personal data.
The lawyer noted that employee consent is not always a sufficient legal basis for collecting this information, given the power imbalance between employer and employee.
She also said that trust is essential: even when a survey is described as anonymous, professionals may be reluctant to share personal information if they fear it could affect their promotion prospects or job security.
She therefore argued that any data collection system should start with a question: what does the organisation intend to measure, and how will it use that information?
France and the limits of mandatory indicators
Danny Rifaat, partner at Teynier Pic (France), offered the French perspective on mechanisms for measuring equality.
He explained that France requires certain companies to publish an annual gender equality index based on indicators such as pay gaps, pay rises, promotions and the representation of women among the highest-paid employees.
However, he warned that extending this model to other dimensions of diversity, such as ethnic origin or religious beliefs, raises significant legal and cultural obstacles.
His contribution showed that metrics acceptable in one jurisdiction may be inappropriate or even incompatible with another jurisdiction’s rules.
Pay transparency: from data to corporate accountability
Another central topic was the EU Pay Transparency Directive, designed to strengthen mechanisms for identifying and addressing pay gaps between women and men.
Sophie Maes explained that traditional pay reporting systems have not always succeeded in reducing inequalities, partly because of a lack of consistent definitions, transparency mechanisms and effective remediation procedures.
The new EU rules introduce more specific pay reporting obligations and give workers the right to know pay levels for comparable roles.
Among its provisions is a requirement to conduct joint pay assessments in certain circumstances when unjustified differences of more than 5% are identified and not corrected within the prescribed period.
For law firms, these requirements mean reviewing not only pay scales, but also the criteria for work allocation, performance assessment and career progression.
Measurement is not enough: the challenge of accountability
In the final part of the session, Mariana Estradé returned to the link between data collection and tangible results.
The question was no longer simply what information firms should collect, but how to turn that information into decisions that address inequalities.
Participants agreed that having statistics does not in itself guarantee progress on diversity and inclusion.
Indicators must be accompanied by clear targets, monitoring mechanisms, institutional accountability and measures capable of addressing the problems identified.
The experience presented by EQUALIS showed the value of combining aggregated labour market data with analysis of individual organisations, while respecting applicable privacy restrictions.
The UK model, in turn, showed that data collected over several years can reveal patterns of inequality that remain hidden when only the numerical representation of women and men is examined.
The session moderated by Mariana Estradé and Claudia Barrero left a particularly relevant conclusion for Latin American law firms: diversity cannot be assessed solely by the number of women who join a firm or their presence in its leadership.
It is also necessary to examine pay differences, the allocation of higher-value work, promotion opportunities, the use of parental leave and the actual conditions for career development.
The challenge is to build measurement systems that are legally sound, culturally sensitive and rigorous enough to turn diversity commitments into verifiable progress.
Key facts
Event: International Bar Association (IBA) Annual Conference, Copenhagen 2026
Date: 7 October 2026
Session: Measuring what matters: data, metrics and accountability in diversity and inclusion
Moderators: Mariana Estradé (Hughes & Hughes, Uruguay) and Claudia Barrero (Philippi Prietocarrizosa Ferrero DU & Uría, Colombia)
Participants: Sophie Maes (Claeys & Engels, Belgium), Gine Maltha Kampmann (EQUALIS, Denmark), Kirsty Brimelow KC (Bar Council of England and Wales) and Danny Rifaat (Teynier Pic, France)
Pay gap in England and Wales: Women barristers in the early stages of their careers earn approximately 76% of the income of their male counterparts; among King’s Counsel, the figure is 72%, according to figures presented at the session
Diversity in law firms: Danish data show a steady decline in women’s representation towards equity partner positions
Key challenges: Data protection, confidentiality, regulatory differences, employee trust and assessment of career opportunities
Pay transparency: EU rules introduce new mechanisms for reporting and addressing pay inequalities
Conclusion: Diversity measurement must be accompanied by effective accountability, monitoring and remediation mechanisms
