How marvelous. A fresh batch of “best” law firms for women lists. They are proliferating like bunnies across the American legal landscape. Law360, Working Mother and our own National Law Journal are just some of the publications that recently put out such lists. (Yale Law Women issues one too; it’s called “Top 10 Family-Friendly Firms”—a much more P.C. moniker.)

I’d love to say that these lists signal an abundance of opportunities for women in law. But that’s not how I see them. I find these lists confusing, if not misleading. And sad.

Often, firms get the “best” designation because they boast a high percentage of women lawyers—even though not many of them are actual shareholders.

The result is that firms with below-average percentage of women equity partners can get a skewed ranking, as I see it. For example, Baker McKenzie (16.4 percent female equity partners; the national average hovers around 18 percent) ranks No. 24 on the NLJ’s list, while Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison (23.3 female equity partners) only ranks No. 38. Using a similar formula, Law360 puts Baker McKenzie in second place on its best women’s list in the 600-plus law firm category, tying with Jackson Lewis.

To me the proof in the equality pudding is how many women are elevated to equity partner. If women aren’t equal stakeholders with men, how can anyone say they have any genuine power?

Which brings up my big pet peeve: Too often, these lists reward effort rather than result. That’s my quibble with Working Mother. (Yale Law Women also emphasizes part-time and caregiver leave policies, in addition to percentage of women in leadership.) Though law firms on Working Mother’s list averaged 20 percent female equity partners, there were some duds: Most glaring was Blank Rome, with only 9 percent female equity partners. (Runner-up was Foley & Lardner with 13 percent female equity partners.)