I participated to the round table "Gender Quotas in Company Boards: solution or problem", organized by Guberna, Belgian insitute for directors, and the University og Ghent.
After an overview of initiatives and law passed in different European countries by Claire Bury, 3 men talked passionately about why gender quotas are unwanted, unnecessary and illegal.
Interestingly, no women were invited to speak, and all speakers were against gender quota.
Philippe Lambrecht (VBO) started by arguing against the gender quota law, mainly from an ideological perspective: government shouldn't intervene in private company matters, and should put faith and trust in the self regulating capacity of companies. He described the gender quota law as a left wing law.
Hans De Wulf (University Ghent) continued on this idea with an overview of research published on the economical benefits of having a gender balanced board. Surprisingly (or not?), he managed to favour those studies supporting his conviction that board diversity really isn't such a good thing for companies, and wiped studies suggesting otherwise under the carpet. I was particularly amused by his remark on the studies published by Catalyst: according to this professor, Catalyst is a lobbying organisation that doesn't support its findings with hard facts and insights on the methodologies used. A simple glance at www.catalyst.org will tell you otherwise.
Finally, Marc De Vos (Itinera) got very excited in arguing why gender quota law is in fact discrimination and as such unwanted and unnecessary.
What appeared to be a round tabel discussion, ended up being a 2 hour monologue against gender quota, organised by Guberna.
One woman CEO sitting next to me said "I think I'm in the wrong meeting here".
I was thinking "if the energy these guys built up in fighting the quota law would be used to actively get more diversity on boards, we would'nt need such a law."
A missed opportunity.
Don't forget middle management - especially the women
Wharton management professor Ethan Mollick has a message for knowledge-based companies: pay closer attention to your middle managers. They may have a greater impact on company performance than almost any other part of the organization!
Mollick found that it was middle managers, rather than innovators or company strategy, who best explained the differences in firm performance. Middle managers accounted for 22.3% of the variation in revenue among projects, as opposed to just over 7% explained by innovators and 21.3% explained by the organization itself – including firm strategy, leadership and practices. "Far from being interchangeable," Mollick writes, "individuals uniquely contribute to the success or failure of a firm…. For a lot of knowledge-based industries – it is all about the middle managers."
Earlier studies show that the impact of CEOs, CFOs and other top-level executives on large firms is limited. These top positions explain less than 5% of the variation in firm performance among Fortune 800 companies. In large, established organizations, "the top managers, at least, account for relatively little of why some companies perform better than others."
Mollick says. "We tend to think of companies as all about systems and not enough about people." He suggests that companies pay more attention to filling middle levels of management, figuring out who the best ones are and rewarding them appropriately.
Interesting to know that women often stagnate at middle management level. It's a level in which the pressure is high, support is relatively low and especially women come to question the meaning of their work. "Is it all worth it?" is a phrase we hear very often.
We also see many of these women experiencing great difficulties getting (small) training budgets. Wharton's research confirms it IS important to invest in middle managers, to make sure they develop balanced leadership skills. They make meaningful contributions to the organization's success and to its people. Let's start by valuing their work and offering more support.
Read more: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2783
Effective Leadership for Women Training: click here for more info and dates.
Mollick found that it was middle managers, rather than innovators or company strategy, who best explained the differences in firm performance. Middle managers accounted for 22.3% of the variation in revenue among projects, as opposed to just over 7% explained by innovators and 21.3% explained by the organization itself – including firm strategy, leadership and practices. "Far from being interchangeable," Mollick writes, "individuals uniquely contribute to the success or failure of a firm…. For a lot of knowledge-based industries – it is all about the middle managers."
Earlier studies show that the impact of CEOs, CFOs and other top-level executives on large firms is limited. These top positions explain less than 5% of the variation in firm performance among Fortune 800 companies. In large, established organizations, "the top managers, at least, account for relatively little of why some companies perform better than others."
Mollick says. "We tend to think of companies as all about systems and not enough about people." He suggests that companies pay more attention to filling middle levels of management, figuring out who the best ones are and rewarding them appropriately.
Interesting to know that women often stagnate at middle management level. It's a level in which the pressure is high, support is relatively low and especially women come to question the meaning of their work. "Is it all worth it?" is a phrase we hear very often.
We also see many of these women experiencing great difficulties getting (small) training budgets. Wharton's research confirms it IS important to invest in middle managers, to make sure they develop balanced leadership skills. They make meaningful contributions to the organization's success and to its people. Let's start by valuing their work and offering more support.
Read more: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article.cfm?articleid=2783
Effective Leadership for Women Training: click here for more info and dates.
Men are fathers too!
Yesterday I was one of the keynote speakers at JUMP Forum, a great event that puts gender balance on the agenda every year, and raises the key questions time and again.
This kind of event always gives me a great buzz and energy boost: lots of brainwaves, interesting people, discussions, time for sharing experiences and getting new insights.
What struck me this time was a remark by Isabella Lenarduzzi, founder of Jump, at the end of the day. She had been interviewed by several female journalists, and all had asked her the same question: how do women combine their careers with their family life?
I almost fell of my chair (and it wouldn't have been e pleasant sight sitting on that stage)!
Firstly because women still get this question in 2011.
Secondly because the question is asked at an event like that.
Thirdly because it came from young female journalists.
It would be really interesting to put some thought and study into how men & women in media companies work, and how they think about gender balance. Journalists are no longer the gatekeepers, but they do have influence by framing topics in a specific context and setting the tone, the narrative.
Let's stop acting as if women are the only ones who are responsible / caring for their children. Confining the "family" component to women only is just wrong.
I expect young (and other) fathers to step into this discussion, and demand that next time, they too are asked about how they combine work and family life, and that they too are recognized as playing a crucial role in the upbringing of their kids.
This kind of event always gives me a great buzz and energy boost: lots of brainwaves, interesting people, discussions, time for sharing experiences and getting new insights.
What struck me this time was a remark by Isabella Lenarduzzi, founder of Jump, at the end of the day. She had been interviewed by several female journalists, and all had asked her the same question: how do women combine their careers with their family life?
I almost fell of my chair (and it wouldn't have been e pleasant sight sitting on that stage)!
Firstly because women still get this question in 2011.
Secondly because the question is asked at an event like that.
Thirdly because it came from young female journalists.
It would be really interesting to put some thought and study into how men & women in media companies work, and how they think about gender balance. Journalists are no longer the gatekeepers, but they do have influence by framing topics in a specific context and setting the tone, the narrative.
Let's stop acting as if women are the only ones who are responsible / caring for their children. Confining the "family" component to women only is just wrong.
I expect young (and other) fathers to step into this discussion, and demand that next time, they too are asked about how they combine work and family life, and that they too are recognized as playing a crucial role in the upbringing of their kids.
Two Things you need for Balanced Leadership
Women are still largely underrepresented in top management and boards. The dominant culture at the top is a masculine culture, putting forward masculine qualities, values and behaviors. Metaresearch by Catalyst revealed that corporate culture is a stronger factor for predicting leadership effectiveness than gender. In other words, dominant masculine corporate cultures “produce” predominantly masculine leaders (both men and women).
However, feminine qualities and values are missing at top levels. Some examples: the ability to connect with increasingly diverse customers and (younger) employees, the ability to listen, to take a step back, to think long term, the drive to take up a societal role through sustainable businesses with respect for people and planet, to create the right conditions for creativity and innovation by putting together diverse teams, etc…
Until now, a lot of energy has been put in “selling” the women (make the business case), or “fixing” the women (get women to play the political game), in order for them to advance on the corporate ladder.
As long as we do not confront and try to change the dominant masculine culture, neither approach will work. In a dominant masculine culture, women are expected to act in a “feminine” way (taking care behavior) while men are encouraged to behave in a “masculine” way (taking charge behavior). There is little room to fundamentally question these stereotypes which are holding back both women and more sensitive/feminine men.
Men and women have an inner masculine and feminine pole (as already described by C.G. Jung).
Every individual has the potential to develop both sides and thus achieve personal balance.
Balanced Leadership is about recognizing, valuing, developing and using those inner masculine and feminine qualities.
It’s a way forward for men and women to grow as an individual and a leader, beyond gender stereotypes and stereotypical definitions of leadership. It’s the kind of new leadership we urgently need to develop if we want to be ready for the future challenges of our planet.
Balanced Leadership requires two things:
1. A new definition of leadership, combining feminine and masculine qualities to define excellent leadership, this implies rewriting leadership competencies and models and rethinking leadership development modules
2. A new look at gender: seeing it as an important and valuable part of an individual, but not limited to the “gender roles”, this implies talking about gender roles and not sweeping them under the carpet
Read more on the website of The Centre for Balanced Leadership.
However, feminine qualities and values are missing at top levels. Some examples: the ability to connect with increasingly diverse customers and (younger) employees, the ability to listen, to take a step back, to think long term, the drive to take up a societal role through sustainable businesses with respect for people and planet, to create the right conditions for creativity and innovation by putting together diverse teams, etc…
Until now, a lot of energy has been put in “selling” the women (make the business case), or “fixing” the women (get women to play the political game), in order for them to advance on the corporate ladder.
As long as we do not confront and try to change the dominant masculine culture, neither approach will work. In a dominant masculine culture, women are expected to act in a “feminine” way (taking care behavior) while men are encouraged to behave in a “masculine” way (taking charge behavior). There is little room to fundamentally question these stereotypes which are holding back both women and more sensitive/feminine men.
Men and women have an inner masculine and feminine pole (as already described by C.G. Jung).
Every individual has the potential to develop both sides and thus achieve personal balance.
Balanced Leadership is about recognizing, valuing, developing and using those inner masculine and feminine qualities.
It’s a way forward for men and women to grow as an individual and a leader, beyond gender stereotypes and stereotypical definitions of leadership. It’s the kind of new leadership we urgently need to develop if we want to be ready for the future challenges of our planet.
Balanced Leadership requires two things:
1. A new definition of leadership, combining feminine and masculine qualities to define excellent leadership, this implies rewriting leadership competencies and models and rethinking leadership development modules
2. A new look at gender: seeing it as an important and valuable part of an individual, but not limited to the “gender roles”, this implies talking about gender roles and not sweeping them under the carpet
Read more on the website of The Centre for Balanced Leadership.
MIT needs a balanced culture
A two-day symposium at MIT this week celebrated the research accomplishments of some of the top minds in science and engineering.
The event was titled “Leaders in Science and Engineering: The Women of MIT.”
Over the past 15 years, the number of women faculty members in the School of Engineering has doubled, from 8 to 16 percent, and in the School of Science they have more than doubled, from 8 to 19 percent. But despite aggressive steps taken by universities, the under-representation still exists. There is still a high percentage of women who leave science and engineering after having earned degrees in those fields.
Graduate students have said that rather than the “sink or swim” culture that has prevailed through the years, the Institute should develop a "culture of caring".
Time for MIT to discover what it means to develop a balanced culture :)
Read more in the MIT News.
The event was titled “Leaders in Science and Engineering: The Women of MIT.”
Over the past 15 years, the number of women faculty members in the School of Engineering has doubled, from 8 to 16 percent, and in the School of Science they have more than doubled, from 8 to 19 percent. But despite aggressive steps taken by universities, the under-representation still exists. There is still a high percentage of women who leave science and engineering after having earned degrees in those fields.
Graduate students have said that rather than the “sink or swim” culture that has prevailed through the years, the Institute should develop a "culture of caring".
Time for MIT to discover what it means to develop a balanced culture :)
Read more in the MIT News.
Launch of The Balanced Leader a success
The launch of the book The Balanced Leader yesterday evening was a success: we have received so many "thank you" and "congratulations" notes today we're beaming and buzzing with joy!
Astrid De Lathauwer, HR Director at Belgacom, kicked off the evening by putting question marks next to an overall predominantly masculine corporate culture and the need for a different value set for the future.
An audience of 400 men and women listened, reflected, connected and discussed with each other about their feminine and masculine inner pole and the relevance and necessity of both for Balanced Leadership.
If you want to order your copy of the book, please click here.
Astrid De Lathauwer, HR Director at Belgacom, kicked off the evening by putting question marks next to an overall predominantly masculine corporate culture and the need for a different value set for the future.
An audience of 400 men and women listened, reflected, connected and discussed with each other about their feminine and masculine inner pole and the relevance and necessity of both for Balanced Leadership.
If you want to order your copy of the book, please click here.
Where are the Women in Science?
Needless to say that gender balance in science and technology is a difficult one to establish. Women are underrepresented in science and technology at university, and are not pursuing careers in these domains.
The prospects offered to women by the industry and academic world apparently are not appealing. Too few women consider building their career in science and technology, even though these have a huge impact on our daily lives. Resulting in predominantly male corporate environments, with a predominantly masculine top down decision making style, which sort of creates a vicious circle effect when it comes to developing a better gender balance.
Time to act and pimp up these crucial domains in order to get women on board.
On March 4 2011 a free seminar is organized by Jump and ECWT.
Click here to view more details.
Interesting set up, and if you are looking for female role models in science and technology you will be impressed with the people playing a role in this seminar!
The prospects offered to women by the industry and academic world apparently are not appealing. Too few women consider building their career in science and technology, even though these have a huge impact on our daily lives. Resulting in predominantly male corporate environments, with a predominantly masculine top down decision making style, which sort of creates a vicious circle effect when it comes to developing a better gender balance.
Time to act and pimp up these crucial domains in order to get women on board.
On March 4 2011 a free seminar is organized by Jump and ECWT.
Click here to view more details.
Interesting set up, and if you are looking for female role models in science and technology you will be impressed with the people playing a role in this seminar!
The Balanced Leader
This is it: the cover of our book The Balanced Leader...
The book will be available both in Dutch and English, as of April 5 2011.
We are preparing a great networking evening on April 5th with a spectacular set of panel members to introduce the dynamics of Balanced Leadership.
If you are in the Brussels area on April 5th, join us!
To register for the event on April 5th : click this link.
Mummy I want to be a CEO
Marion Chapsal wrote a very good article on her blog Geronimo Coaching: Mummy I want to be a housewife.
Recent articles and opinions of researchers point out that women are not at all eager to climb the career ladder, and that they are quite happy sheltering under their husband's protective shield.
We've had the same reflections here last year when a Dutch female journalist published a book stating that women prefer to work part time, go shopping and drink coffee instead of slaving long hours to get that promotion ("The myth of the glass ceiling by Stellinga).
Trying to change corporate cultures is hard work. It's like stretching an elastic band; it just wants to spring back to its original state.
Marion refers to a study to be published by Dr Hakim who says "Men dominate top positions because many women simply do not want long careers in business". And I agree with her. It's not easy to motivate women to pitch for senior positions when the game is an all-masculine one.
But that doesn't mean the rules of the game can't be changed. More feminine values and qualities will most definitely change the game for the better.
Creativity, innovation, sustainability, employee happiness, customer engagement, productivity and organizational efficiency... we simply need balanced leaders for all of this.
Recent articles and opinions of researchers point out that women are not at all eager to climb the career ladder, and that they are quite happy sheltering under their husband's protective shield.
We've had the same reflections here last year when a Dutch female journalist published a book stating that women prefer to work part time, go shopping and drink coffee instead of slaving long hours to get that promotion ("The myth of the glass ceiling by Stellinga).
Trying to change corporate cultures is hard work. It's like stretching an elastic band; it just wants to spring back to its original state.
Marion refers to a study to be published by Dr Hakim who says "Men dominate top positions because many women simply do not want long careers in business". And I agree with her. It's not easy to motivate women to pitch for senior positions when the game is an all-masculine one.
But that doesn't mean the rules of the game can't be changed. More feminine values and qualities will most definitely change the game for the better.
Creativity, innovation, sustainability, employee happiness, customer engagement, productivity and organizational efficiency... we simply need balanced leaders for all of this.
The balanced leader - coming up
On April 5 2011 we are presenting our book "The balanced leader" by organizing an inspiring business event.
Read more on the website. Registrations for the event will open shortly, I will keep you posted.
Click here to go to the website of "The balanced leader".
Read more on the website. Registrations for the event will open shortly, I will keep you posted.
Click here to go to the website of "The balanced leader".
Is creating gender balance a diversity issue?
Creating a better gender balance in a company is often impossible without putting gender in the wider context of diversity. This means that gender is still on the table, but as one of the elements within an overall diversity policy, including culture, age, language, physical ability, sexual orientation etc etc.
In other words, women are considered as one of the minorities companies need to get on board in order to become more diverse and to create a better reflection in house of the society outdoors.
Of course gender balance has something to do with diversity at large. However I do not agree gender sits well in the list of minorities so often used to describe the diversity approach.
The link between gender balance and diversity is that you need to have both men and women on board, in order to develop a balanced culture and balanced leaders. Balanced leaders value and use both their inner masculine and feminine side. By doing this, they establish an inclusive culture. And building an inclusive culture is the only road to capturing the added value from the diversity you create within your company.
In other words, creating gender balance should come first. Not because women are more important than people with a disability for instance. But simply because creating a masculine/feminine balanced culture is necessary to break the "mold" or the template and start including different views and angles.
Bringing more colour, culture, languages, etc into a team with a predominantly masculine corporate culture will not automatically result in more diversity in viewpoints, more creativity and innovative power.
If you do not challenge the culture, you will not change the outcome.
In other words, women are considered as one of the minorities companies need to get on board in order to become more diverse and to create a better reflection in house of the society outdoors.
Of course gender balance has something to do with diversity at large. However I do not agree gender sits well in the list of minorities so often used to describe the diversity approach.
The link between gender balance and diversity is that you need to have both men and women on board, in order to develop a balanced culture and balanced leaders. Balanced leaders value and use both their inner masculine and feminine side. By doing this, they establish an inclusive culture. And building an inclusive culture is the only road to capturing the added value from the diversity you create within your company.
In other words, creating gender balance should come first. Not because women are more important than people with a disability for instance. But simply because creating a masculine/feminine balanced culture is necessary to break the "mold" or the template and start including different views and angles.
Bringing more colour, culture, languages, etc into a team with a predominantly masculine corporate culture will not automatically result in more diversity in viewpoints, more creativity and innovative power.
If you do not challenge the culture, you will not change the outcome.
106 days to book launch The Balanced Leader
As 2010 is reaching its end, it's time to look forward to 2011.
On April 5th 2011, we will organize the launch of our book "The Balanced Leader".
More information on the book on The Balanced Leader website (in Dutch for now).
On April 5th 2011, we will organize the launch of our book "The Balanced Leader".
More information on the book on The Balanced Leader website (in Dutch for now).
Should women change corporate cultures?
Most of us would agree it takes about 30% of a (minority) group to move away from being regarded as the odd one (or two) out. Having at least 3 women on a board of directors or in a management team ensures they are looked upon as 'individuals' rather than as 'the woman' in the group. It's a thought I can relate to, it seems logical.
What I am having difficulty with, is assuming that a growing number of women in management teams and on boards will automatically change corporate cultures.
A culture has both formal and informal layers, the latter being far more important in defining how people work together in a company.
In our experience, predominantly masculine corporate cultures (and these are the ones you'll mostly find) have a tendency to produce clones and resist challenging the status quo.
A balanced corporate culture defines leadership both in terms of masculine and feminine qualities, and allows and stimulates both men and women to develop and show behaviour beyond their gender roles.
Changing a culture, a system of informal and invisible unwritten rules, is tough. It requires commitment of leaders and engagement of all. Will this automatically happen when more women enter top level positions? I don't think so.
Why? Firstly, I don't think it's fair to expect these women to change a culture singlehandedly while working very hard to establish and develop their positions in masculine corporate cultures. They have enough on their plate.
Secondly, I don't believe it can work as long as we keep on expecting women to change the system. If men don't buy into the advantages of a balanced culture, and a balanced personality, it will not happen.
Balanced leadership has a great deal to offer both to men and women in the workplace and in their personal life. I would argue that men could possibly benefit more from it than women... because they usually haven't been that encouraged or expected to develop their inner feminine qualities in order to get ahead.
Let's not wait another decade to start transforming corporate culture. Our companies urgently need to start developing their inner balance. It will benefit their creativity, flexibility, connectedness, and ultimately their relevance on the marketplace.
What I am having difficulty with, is assuming that a growing number of women in management teams and on boards will automatically change corporate cultures.
A culture has both formal and informal layers, the latter being far more important in defining how people work together in a company.
In our experience, predominantly masculine corporate cultures (and these are the ones you'll mostly find) have a tendency to produce clones and resist challenging the status quo.
A balanced corporate culture defines leadership both in terms of masculine and feminine qualities, and allows and stimulates both men and women to develop and show behaviour beyond their gender roles.
Changing a culture, a system of informal and invisible unwritten rules, is tough. It requires commitment of leaders and engagement of all. Will this automatically happen when more women enter top level positions? I don't think so.
Why? Firstly, I don't think it's fair to expect these women to change a culture singlehandedly while working very hard to establish and develop their positions in masculine corporate cultures. They have enough on their plate.
Secondly, I don't believe it can work as long as we keep on expecting women to change the system. If men don't buy into the advantages of a balanced culture, and a balanced personality, it will not happen.
Balanced leadership has a great deal to offer both to men and women in the workplace and in their personal life. I would argue that men could possibly benefit more from it than women... because they usually haven't been that encouraged or expected to develop their inner feminine qualities in order to get ahead.
Let's not wait another decade to start transforming corporate culture. Our companies urgently need to start developing their inner balance. It will benefit their creativity, flexibility, connectedness, and ultimately their relevance on the marketplace.
IT not ready for female CIO of the Year?
This year's CIO of the Year nomination proved that the jury is not ready for a female laureate yet... The public voting pushed 2 women to the top 3 of the nominees list: Els Blaton (CIO AXA) and Sabine Everaet (Coca Cola Europe). And the title was awareded to... the only man in the top 3 (Daniel Lebeau GSK Biologicals).
The timing couldn't be have been more perfect for a female laureate. It would have been a clear statement and a support for women working in ICT. The award ceremony already proved that: more women than ever turned up yesterday evening (although they are obviously a minority in the IT crowd).
Our message to the jury: the industry is suffering from a poor image and is failing to attract young talents and women. Several studies show that women leave the industry because they feel unapprectiated or uncomfortable with the predominantly masculine culture. A lack of diversity in the teams decreases creativity and efficienty.
If IT wants to take up its strategic role, it will need to wake up and start involving women. A female CIO of the Year would have been a good start...
The timing couldn't be have been more perfect for a female laureate. It would have been a clear statement and a support for women working in ICT. The award ceremony already proved that: more women than ever turned up yesterday evening (although they are obviously a minority in the IT crowd).
Our message to the jury: the industry is suffering from a poor image and is failing to attract young talents and women. Several studies show that women leave the industry because they feel unapprectiated or uncomfortable with the predominantly masculine culture. A lack of diversity in the teams decreases creativity and efficienty.
If IT wants to take up its strategic role, it will need to wake up and start involving women. A female CIO of the Year would have been a good start...
AXA's first Wo_Men@Work Award: it's voting time!
The AXA Wo_Men@Work Award 2010 is the first edition of an annual award that honours a CEO, COO, CFO or member of the Executive Board of a company or organisation established in Belgium. He or she pro-actively promotes gender diversity and is personally committed to guaranteeing the representation of women in the company’s management and top management.
There were a lot of good candidates for this first edition. The jury's top 3 nominees are: Frank Van Massenhove (Social Security), Marc Decorte (Belgian Shell) and Albert Ragon (Danone). Have a look at the videos on the website (click here).
Voting lines are open. I hope to see you at the award ceremony on December 9 in Brussels.
There were a lot of good candidates for this first edition. The jury's top 3 nominees are: Frank Van Massenhove (Social Security), Marc Decorte (Belgian Shell) and Albert Ragon (Danone). Have a look at the videos on the website (click here).
Voting lines are open. I hope to see you at the award ceremony on December 9 in Brussels.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
