• Replies 14 replies
  • Subscribers 3 subscribers
  • Views 2885 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

"I don't think women fit comfortably into the board environment"

Katie Flynn

Today's government-backed Hampton-Alexander Review has found shocking explanations for why a range of FTSE 350 companies do not have more women on their boards, including "they don’t fit in", "they don’t want the hassle" and "all the good ones have already gone".

The story is here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44310225 

The number of all-male FTSE 350 company boards fell from 152 in 2011 to 10 in 2017, but it's clear that much more needs to be done.

What do you think the next steps are to stop the archaic excuses and make real progress on creating gender balance at the top?

Parents
  • Shouldn't we be celebrating the real progress in moving fro 152 to 10 in 6 years rather than picking out random sound bites from the ill informed and backwards?

    This is more of a good news story in reality and as HR people we often suggest the carrot is far more effective than the stick?
  • in reply to Keith

    Hi Keith,

    I think celebrating the progress which has been made is really important. Since the CIPD began as the Welfare Worker's Association in 1913, to improve the working conditions of women in UK factories, progress has been made in civil rights (employment, education, housing etc etc). Has it moved at pace with changes to the working population?

    Excellent progress for gender diversity on boards was made over 5 years from 2011 but progress in 2016 was slow. Shouldn't businesses be reminded to get back on track? It's an ambitious target that the FTSE 350 have 33% female representation on their boards by 2020 and it was the steering group of the Hampton-Alexander Review which said in 2017, "unacceptably five years on [there are] 11 All-male boards in the FTSE 250 (page 32). That wasn't BBC editorial.

    The reason the BBC article raised my eyebrows is because of the quotes lifted from responses which came from CEOs and Chairs – leaders with unequalled influence within the boardroom and beyond. The BBC called them the top 10 excuses but if you read the news story by the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy, they are called the worst excuses. I don't suppose we'll know how representative those excuses are till the referenced review is published on 27 June. 

  • in reply to Victoria Dmochowski
    The bbc choose to go with a headline that gather attention to its story. Fair enough.

    We as a professional institute shouldn’t be so concerned with headlines but with the real progress being made.

    The FACT that in the survey period it went from over 40% of 350 boards having no female representation to under 3% is a huge and generational change.

    Sure there is much more to be done but the positive story is the real story here no matter what the headlines say.
Reply
  • in reply to Victoria Dmochowski
    The bbc choose to go with a headline that gather attention to its story. Fair enough.

    We as a professional institute shouldn’t be so concerned with headlines but with the real progress being made.

    The FACT that in the survey period it went from over 40% of 350 boards having no female representation to under 3% is a huge and generational change.

    Sure there is much more to be done but the positive story is the real story here no matter what the headlines say.
Children
No Data