What attracted you to the world of IP?

ZOE BUTLER: I started out my academic life convinced that I was destined for a career in science. Although my mother was a lawyer—specialising in family law—and my role-model, it wasn’t until I was part-way through my degree that my interest in law was piqued. I can still picture the moment my mother told me that she had read about this area of law called IP which seemed to offer the perfect combination of a legal career and an interest in science.

The appeal was immediate and, although I enjoyed the diversity of work during my training contract, I kept gravitating back to IP and, in particular, patent litigation. I loved the diversity of work, the international dimension to the work, and the increasing relevance and significance of IP to different industries.

TESS WALDRON: If I had to sum it up in one word, I’d say variety. I have always been fascinated by learning how things work and what they do. When I was a child, I loved science books that featured a different topic on each page, so that on one you’d learn about the solar system and about how fish breathe on the next.

I find that patent law gives you the same breadth of experience. Since I was a trainee, I have learned about a plethora of different technologies, including anti-epileptics, transcatheter heart valves, video compression, microscopes and robotics, all of which have been fascinating.

With each new client or matter you get to meet new people, including experts who are right at the top of their fields, and find out about new businesses and sectors. It is always different and hugely stimulating.

What can be done to attract more women and people from diverse backgrounds to IP?

WALDRON: In the UK, there is a lot more to be done to attract people from diverse backgrounds into law generally, let alone into IP. At the individual or firm level, it is difficult to address in any meaningful way the broad structural inequalities that underpin the sector’s lack of diversity, but it is important to try our best to mitigate those factors.

At Powell Gilbert, we are actively involved with sixth form (years 11 and 12) mentoring schemes, as well as with IP Inclusive, which is dedicated to improving diversity in the IP profession.

In terms of women in IP, the issue may be more one of career progression and retention rather than attracting people into IP in the first place. I am lucky that I work with some great female role models at Powell Gilbert and externally and have always felt very supported, but women are still generally under-represented at the top of the profession, in particular among the judiciary.

There’s no easy fix for this, but a very practical thing we can do is to encourage both partners to take shared parental or adoption leave when they become parents. Once domestic and caring responsibilities more generally are shared equally there is less likely to be a “motherhood penalty”.

BUTLER: I agree that when it comes to women in IP, the issue is perhaps more one of keeping women in the profession rather than necessarily attracting them to a career in IP in the first place. We have recruited some very talented women as associates at Powell Gilbert and we strive to provide them with a clear career progression path and support in realising their potential, as we do for all our associates—around half of whom are women.

Encouraging all associates, whatever their gender, to take shared parental/adoption leave is an important practical step that we can take to signal that we consider domestic and caring responsibilities as gender-neutral. I am involved in the firm’s recruitment efforts, and it is a source of frustration that we don’t see a significantly more diverse pool of candidates applying for associate positions.

Initiatives such as Powell Gilbert’s mentoring scheme are important, but clearly more needs to be done to address structural inequalities that hold back people from diverse backgrounds from considering law or science in the first place.

Is the legal profession doing enough to promote D&I?

WALDRON: I believe that the legal profession is sincere in its efforts to promote diversity and inclusion (D&I) and remains years ahead of some other industries. But the profession is not reflective of the wider population, in particular in terms of ethnicity, disability and socio-economic status, so there is a lot of room for improvement.

BUTLER: There are a number of great initiatives in the legal profession to promote D&I whether within individual firms with flexible working initiatives, generous paternity/maternity/shared parental/adoption leave policies and mentoring schemes, and in the wider profession with organisations such as ChIPs and IP Inclusive. There is a genuine desire on the part of the legal profession to do better in terms of D&I, but there is some way still to go.