THE AUTHOR<\/strong>: In the week following International Women\u2019s Day 2026, the SCC Arbitration Institute<\/a> (“SCC<\/strong>“) together with host Cirio Advokatbyr\u00e5 held a breakfast seminar <\/a>bringing together academic research, law firm leadership and the institutional perspective of the SCC. The focus of the discussion was gender equality in the legal profession, viewed through a lens increasingly relevant for international arbitration. That is, the role of client relationships in shaping professional opportunities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The seminar, moderated by Karin Ljungman<\/a><\/strong>, combined two complementary perspectives. The first was Project E.V.A.<\/a> (Equally Valued Attorneys), presented by Jenny Lantz<\/strong>, Stockholm School of Economics, and developed in close collaboration with Cirio. The second was the SCC\u2019s ongoing work on diversity and transparency in arbitration, grounded in data and long-term institutional responsibility. Together, these perspectives highlighted how early-stage professional dynamics \u2013 often well before a dispute ever arises \u2013 can influence who is visible, trusted and ultimately appointed in arbitration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From the institutional perspective, diversity is not an abstract aspiration. It goes to the legitimacy, quality and long-term sustainability of arbitration as a dispute resolution mechanism. Who appears as counsel, who builds client relationships, and who is perceived as a \u201csafe pair of hands\u201d are all factors that, over time, feed directly into arbitrator appointments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The SCC\u2019s diversity reporting has consistently shown that while institutions can and should take responsibility for their own appointments, the decisive factor in arbitrator diversity remains party appointments. That reality makes it particularly important to understand how professional visibility and trust are built in the first place. In that sense, the client relationship \u2013 long before any arbitral tribunal is constituted \u2013 deserves closer scrutiny.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, recent data demonstrates that progress is both possible and tangible when diversity is treated as a strategic priority. According to the SCC\u2019s forthcoming Report on Arbitrator Appointments in SCC Cases 2020\u20132024<\/em>, women arbitrator appointments increased by 70 per cent<\/strong> in the period 2020\u20132024 compared to 2015-2019. Of the 1,107 arbitrator appointments<\/strong> covered by the report, 33 per cent were women and 67 per cent were men<\/strong>. Where the SCC itself made the appointment, the picture was even more balanced: 51 per cent of arbitrators appointed by the SCC Board were women<\/strong>, and 49 per cent were men<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These figures are not coincidental. They reflect consistent, deliberate commitment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The composition of the room itself illustrated the issues under discussion. Participants included both transactional and disputes lawyers, spanning seniority levels from associates to partners. Yet, out of the entire group, only three participants were men. While the seminar was not designed as a representative sample, the imbalance was nonetheless striking \u2013 and familiar. It echoed a recurring pattern observed in both law firms and arbitration. While women are often well represented in discussions, initiatives and junior to mid-senior roles, structural bottlenecks continue to appear further along the pipeline, particularly in positions associated with client origination, visibility and ultimate decision-making power.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From an arbitration perspective, this matters. Who builds client trust, who leads mandates, and who is perceived as a natural choice for complex disputes are factors that, over time, influence who is put forward \u2013 and accepted \u2013 as arbitrator.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Project E.V.A. starts from a practical observation that resonates far beyond any single firm. Clients, particularly in traditionally male-dominated sectors such as finance, often gravitate towards male lawyers. Because client origination and revenue generation remain critical to career progression, these patterns can compound over time, reinforcing inequality at senior levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Rather than treating this as a purely internal law\u2011firm issue, Project E.V.A. deliberately places the client relationship at the centre of the analysis. Lantz presented research based on an interview study involving 17 participants, drawing on organisational and gender research to identify which aspects of client relationships are most relevant from an equality perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Among the most critical factors identified were long\u2011standing and personal client relationships, perceptions of risk and uncertainty, working conditions and organisational structures, as well as professional culture and networks. A key insight, Lantz observed, was that without understanding how these dynamics operate in practice, equality initiatives risk addressing symptoms rather than causes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the strengths of Project E.V.A. is that it does not stop at diagnosis. Following the interview study, a series of thematic workshops were organised, each combining empirical findings with relevant research. Participants then developed concrete proposals for change, which ultimately formed the basis for Cirio\u2019s code of conduct launched in 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The code is intentionally practical. It is not designed as a rigid compliance tool, but as a reminder of everyday choices and behaviours that can either reinforce or challenge inequality in client interactions. Inequality is often sustained not by explicit decisions, but by unexamined habits. That also means that relatively small, conscious adjustments can have a measurable impact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During the seminar, Lantz focused on two dimensions of the client relationship: long-term personal ties, and perceived risk and uncertainty. Placed in the broader context of research on professional services firms, these factors are especially relevant for arbitration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Legal services are characterised by what researchers often call \u201copaque quality.” For non\u2011experts, legal advice \u2013 and by extension arbitral advocacy \u2013 is difficult to assess, even after it has been delivered. As a result, reputation, familiarity and personal trust play a disproportionate role in client decision\u2011making. These dynamics, Lantz noted, are not unique to law firms. Rather, they are equally present when parties select counsel or arbitrators.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Professional services firms are also environments in which individual autonomy is highly valued. Client relationships can further strengthen that autonomy, which can render leadership and change management particularly challenging. Lantz referred to literature stating that leading such organisations can at times feel like \u201cherding cats.” None of this makes change impossible, but it does mean that equality efforts must be deliberate, well-anchored and consistently reinforced.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The seminar also addressed the broader transformation currently underway in the legal profession, including technological change. New tools, new business models and evolving client expectations are reshaping how legal work is delivered and evaluated. From an arbitration perspective, these developments may also influence who gains visibility and how expertise is recognised.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Without an explicit equality lens, there is a risk that new systems simply reproduce existing patterns in a different form \u2013 whether through how work is allocated, how performance is measured, or how professional profiles are built. Continued research, transparency and institutional engagement will be necessary to address this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From Cirio\u2019s side, Managing Partner Emma Dansbo<\/strong> shared reflections on how the firm has continued its equality work following Project E.V.A. A central theme was persistence. Equality, Dansbo argued, is not achieved through one\u2011off initiatives, but through sustained effort, cultural change and a willingness to challenge established norms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While clients and the wider market clearly play a role, Dansbo emphasised that responsibility ultimately rests with law firms themselves. Structural challenges do not resolve themselves. Change requires active leadership, including making career paths more transparent, addressing culture and leadership issues, and enabling flexible working models.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The forthcoming SCC report also shows where progress has been most pronounced. Women appointed as sole arbitrator or chairperson increased from 29 per cent (2015\u20132019) to 44 per cent (2020\u20132024)<\/strong>, while women appointed as co-arbitrators increased from 14 per cent to 32 per cent<\/strong> over the same period. These developments demonstrate that when institutions take gender diversity seriously, and apply that commitment consistently, meaningful change will follow.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At the same time, the SCC’s experience confirms that institutions alone cannot solve issues of representation. Because party appointments play such a decisive role, progress depends on awareness and engagement across the entire arbitration ecosystem: clients, counsel, law firms and institutions alike. Understanding how professional trust and visibility are built is therefore not peripheral to arbitration \u2013 it is central to its future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The seminar offered a focused examination of how equality, client relationships and arbitration intersect. It reinforced a point that deserves greater attention: who appears in arbitral proceedings is shaped long before a dispute arises.<\/p>\n\n\n\n By combining academic research, firm\u2011level experience and an institutional perspective, the seminar demonstrated how different actors can contribute to a more inclusive arbitration landscape. Small changes, grounded in evidence and implemented consistently, can have lasting effects \u2013 particularly when they are supported by transparency and shared responsibility.<\/p>\n\n\n\n From the SCC\u2019s perspective, that is precisely where the most meaningful progress is made.<\/p>\n\n\n\n ABOUT THE AUTHOR<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Jake Lowther<\/strong>\u00a0refers to himself as a \u201ccivilized common law lawyer\u201d, having first qualified in Australia and then in Sweden. He is currently Specialist Counsel at the\u00a0SCC Arbitration Institute (\u201cSCC\u201d)<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0in Stockholm. Prior to joining the SCC, Jake was an Associate in the M&A and dispute resolution teams at Nordic-Baltic law firm\u00a0Magnusson<\/a>. Before this Jake worked in Seoul, Korea as Foreign Legal Specialist at the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board\u2019s international division,\u00a0KCAB INTERNATIONAL<\/a>. Jake also has experience of arbitration practice in Germany, which he obtained alongside completing the International Dispute Resolution LL.M. program at Humboldt-University of Berlin. Jake began his legal career at\u00a0Ashurst<\/a>\u00a0in Australia, where he worked in the employment, M&A, and infrastructure teams. *The views and opinions expressed by authors are theirs and do not necessarily reflect those of their organizations, employers, or Daily Jus, Jus Mundi, or Jus Connect.<\/em><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Client choice drives arbitrator diversity\u2014insights from the Nordic perspective on equality in international arbitration.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":290113,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":{"subtitle":"","format":"standard","video":"","gallery":"","source_name":"","source_url":"","via_name":"","via_url":"","override_template":"0","override":[{"template":"custom","single_blog_custom":"274736","parallax":"1","fullscreen":"1","layout":"right-sidebar","sidebar":"author","second_sidebar":"default-sidebar","sticky_sidebar":"1","share_position":"hide","share_float_style":"share-monocrhome","show_share_counter":"0","show_view_counter":"0","show_featured":"1","show_post_meta":"1","show_post_author":"0","show_post_author_image":"0","show_post_date":"1","post_date_format":"default","post_date_format_custom":"Y\/m\/d","show_post_category":"0","show_post_reading_time":"0","post_reading_time_wpm":"300","show_zoom_button":"0","zoom_button_out_step":"2","zoom_button_in_step":"3","show_post_tag":"0","show_prev_next_post":"0","show_popup_post":"0","number_popup_post":"1","show_author_box":"0","show_post_related":"0","show_inline_post_related":"0"}],"override_image_size":"0","image_override":[{"single_post_thumbnail_size":"crop-500","single_post_gallery_size":"crop-500"}],"trending_post":"0","trending_post_position":"meta","trending_post_label":"Trending","sponsored_post":"0","sponsored_post_label":"Sponsored by","sponsored_post_name":"","sponsored_post_url":"","sponsored_post_logo_enable":"0","sponsored_post_logo":"","sponsored_post_desc":"","disable_ad":"0"},"jnews_primary_category":{"id":"210","hide":""},"jnews_social_meta":{"fb_title":"From Counsel to Arbitrator: Client Choice, Equality and Responsibility in International Arbitration","fb_description":"Client choice drives arbitrator diversity\u2014insights from the Nordic perspective on equality in international arbitration.","fb_image":"290112","twitter_title":"From Counsel to Arbitrator: Client Choice, Equality and Responsibility in International Arbitration","twitter_description":"Client choice drives arbitrator diversity\u2014insights from the Nordic perspective on equality in international arbitration.","twitter_image":"290112"},"jnews_review":[],"enable_review":"0","type":"percentage","name":"","summary":"","brand":"","sku":"","good":[{"good_text":""}],"bad":[{"bad_text":""}],"score_override":"0","override_value":"","rating":[{"rating_text":"","rating_number":"10"}],"price":[{"shop":"","price":"","link":"","icon":""}],"jnews_override_counter":{"override_view_counter":"0","view_counter_number":"0","override_share_counter":"0","share_counter_number":"0","override_like_counter":"0","like_counter_number":"0","override_dislike_counter":"0","dislike_counter_number":"0"},"footnotes":""},"categories":[250,205,207,210,188,129,247],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-290108","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-arbitral-institutions-spotlights","category-arbitration","category-commercial-arbitration","category-conference-reports","category-legal-insights","category-news","category-worldwide-perspectives"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/290108","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=290108"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/290108\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":290117,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/290108\/revisions\/290117"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/290113"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=290108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=290108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=290108"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=290108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
Jake Lowther<\/strong>, Specialist Counsel at the\u00a0SCC Arbitration Institute<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\nWhy this Matters for Arbitration<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
A Revealing Room<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Project E.V.A.: Shifting the Analytical Focus<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
From Insight to Implementation<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Professional Services, Trust and \u201cOpaque Quality\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Technology, Transformation and Future Risks<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Law\u2011Firm Leadership: Responsibility Starts at Home<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
For the SCC, seminars such as this one form an important part of a broader, long-term approach to diversity in arbitration. Through its diversity reporting and related initiatives, the SCC has consistently sought to make patterns visible, to share data openly and to encourage more systematic approaches to appointments.<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Concluding Reflections<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n