Women in the boardroom

The CBI is reported as saying that all UK listed companies should have to set targets for the number of women in their boardrooms. It said firms that subsequently failed to meet their declared levels should have to explain why (but not face any penalties). Is this the way forwards in addressing the underrepresentation of women in senior positions? What factors are at work here – do women still face a ‘Glass Ceiling’ that stops them from getting to the top?

The CBI aren’t arguing for an overnight revolution: they say that the targets should reflect a firm’s circumstances, so a media company with a high number of female staff should set a higher target for the number of its female directors than an engineering firm with just a handful of women employees. The (female) CBI president said: “Boardrooms should harness the talents of the many, not just the few. Although women make up half of the population and more than half of university graduates, they remain woefully under-represented at board level. What is needed is cultural change, not quotas, ratios or tokenism. That is why we are calling for a flexible system that will allow firms to set targets that reflect the realities of their businesses.”

A recent Cranfield School of Management study showed that the number of female executives in top jobs at the UK’s leading 100 firms is almost unchanged for a third year running. There were 135 female directors out of 1,076 people on FTSE 100 boards, or 12.5%. The figure was 12.2% in 2009 and 12% in 2008, suggesting that the situation is stagnating, the report argues. The research also looked at FTSE 250 companies, where 52.4% (131) of companies have no women on their boards.

The Equalities Minister said: “While I’m pleased to see the number of female-free boardrooms continuing to fall, it’s worrying that women - who make up more than 50% of the population - still account for just one-eighth of FTSE 100 directors. “Making boards more diverse is not about political correctness - it’s about making sure companies draw senior staff from the widest possible pool of talent, which is good for business, good for staff and good for customers.”

At least there was no waffle (common in the 90s) that argued women had some set of special empathetic skills that would make them especially well suited to the future workplace. Those arguments are easily shot down by people pointing out equally obvious feminine ‘flaws’.

Research by academics at Columbia University meanwhile argues that the barrier to female success is not a glass, but ‘marzipan’ ceiling: there is a lack of male mentors “willing to pull women to the top of the cake” for fear of starting rumours of an affair. The Financial Times rubbishes the claim and submits its own contentious theory for why men hold women back at home. “The biggest reason that alpha women don’t become CEOs is because they have made the common, yet fatal, error of marrying an alpha man ... the lesson for a future female corporate queen is clear. She should choose a husband who is mentally her match, but who is happy to play a supporting role.”

My observations of wives, mothers and sisters backs this up a bit. I’m reminded of a study from America’s National Bureau of Economic Research that found that across northern Europe and America, the total workload combining activity both at work and home is now shared almost equally. Women still do more housework but men make up for it in the workplace.

Economists were working on a different hypothesis – why women, on average, earn less than men. It was a surprise to find that – in the UK as an example - both women and men are spending about 425 minutes a day working. The gap is closest in countries (or families) with high levels of income and education.

Nevertheless, many women do feel they have less spare time than men. That may be to do with the way we use our spare time, and women spend more of it asleep (with blokes watching TV). More to the point; it doesn’t really address how hard the work is. There are few jobs in the workplace more demanding than juggling the needs of young children, a household or care for other dependants. The burden of these jobs falls overwhelmingly on women. Men may face tough demands at work, but find it easier to ‘switch off’ at the end of the day.