Article creator image

BY Romy Newman

What's Keeping More Women from Being on Boards?

Conference Room

Photo credit: Creative Commons

TAGS: Women in the workplace

 

What’s keeping more women from being on boards? Tenure, among other things. Just 17% of Fortune 500 board seats are held by women, according to 2013 research from Catalyst. And yet, further research from Catalyst has shown that companies with more women directors perform better financially on several dimensions:

- Return on Equity: On average, companies with the highest percentages of women board directors outperformed those with the least by 53 percent.

- Return on Sales: On average, companies with the highest percentages of women board directors outperformed those with the least by 42 percent.

- Return on Invested Capital: On average, companies with the highest percentages of women board directors outperformed those with the least by 66 percent.

Even though causation is difficult to prove, many other studies echo this correlation between higher numbers of women on boards and and improved financial returns. For example, there is research showing diversity help improve decision-making outcomes within groups. So what’s really holding back the appointment of more female directors? There are many factors that cause the deficit of women on corporate boards, including a preference for hiring highly experienced CEO’s and CFO’s, who are by simply virtue of the status quo, more often men. Some have also argued that women’s personal choices and discrimination (both overt and unconscious) play a role.

There is another important factor at play that prevents even the increasing numbers of women with appropriate credentials from taking positions on corporate boards: tenure. According to a recent article in The Wall Street Journal, “At S&P 500 companies, long-tenured directors are common: thirty-six percent had served at least a decade, and more than 400 had held their seats for at least 20 years as of Oct 31.” In other words, low turnover means few board seats become available -- making it difficult to change board composition to include women and minorities.

If more activist shareholders took an interest in reducing term limits for board members, the growth in board diversity could potentially accelerate. But will an increased focus on term limits necessarily lead to more diverse boards? Just last week, for example, when activist shareholders proposed wiping out the Yahoo! board and replacing all of their directors, just two of nine proposed directors were women -- compared to four of nine on the previous board.

One commonly discussed solution to the paucity of women on boards is some sort of quota system. For example, several European countries have experimented with quotas or other public pressure tactics to increase female board representation. However, the efficacy of these tactics has been questioned. One study based on Norway’s quota system requiring that women comprise 40% of public company boards found that the benefits of the new law did not “trickle down” to result in more female managers at those firms or benefit similarly qualified women who were not appointed to boards. Nor did women seem to pursue business careers at any higher frequency as a result. Moreover, many women (and men) recoil at the notion of a quota because it risks tokenism and for fear of cementing unfair stereotypes and biases that women need “help” and are less-than-equally qualified for the roles.

It seems then that there are no silver bullets. When it comes to how to improve the number of women on boards, the problem not only needs to be prioritized, but also needs to be solved via multiple avenues -- board tenure is only one of them.

Fairygodboss

Fairygodboss is committed to improving the workplace and lives of women.
Join us by reviewing your employer!
 

 

Related Community Discussions

  • Hello everyone. I'm trying to attend more tech conferences in 2017 but my budget just doesn't allow for a lot of it. Every event seems to cost a lot and I'd love to attend more. Does anyone have any suggestions or ideas for what conferences to attend that are more cost-effective as well as how to get discounted tickets anywhere?

  • I believe that the common day to day issues of sexism (too small to call people out on) wear women down more than the big problems. I've also seen men (who were previously oblivious) become great advocates for women when these situations were pointed out to them.

    I am working on a virtual reality program, which share some of the common problems women run across, training the mind to recognize the problem. I'm looking for some of the common issues people run across. Personal experiences, research you've read, anything would be greatly appreciated! Either reply, or email: info@socialQVR.com

    VR has a huge potential for remapping neural training, and I want to make sure I'm drawing from the wealth of communal knowledge, not just my own experience.

  • How do I get a job at Apple? Every time I apply to a position I feel like my resume disappears in the "cloud".

  • I work in a small company with 43 employees. I supervise a team of 3, our section is responsible for conducting testing on components used in consumer products. A few months ago it came to my attention that one of them was falsifying test reports. I notified my boss and a meeting was scheduled with the employee, rep of her choice, my boss, HR person and myself.

    At the meeting the employee opted to bring a friend from another department. I attempted to provide a summary of the matter when asked by my boss. I say attempt because I was continuously interrupted by the "friend" and the employee with comments that I was jealous of the employee, stupid and that they were tired/bored listening to my attempts to present the summary. My boss and HR stayed silent during all of this.

    After the meeting my boss and HR person said they would deliberate. A week later I was informed that no action would be taken against the employee. I have multiple issues now.

    I feel like the work I am doing has no meaning if someone can get away with falsifying reports (I know it is not rocket science but I don't consider ensuring consumers get quality products to be nothing). The employee and her friend giggle in my presence and make reference to her "getting away with it", I really want nothing to do with her anymore but am still her supervisor. My boss tells me that he does not have confidence in the employee's capabilities and would like me to "get her up to scratch", this is the same employee that stated how stupid I was. So while I had to train her for the position and evaluate her performance I am too stupid at some points (disciplinary role) but am suddenly competent when it comes to getting her up to scratch. I feel used by my boss and get really upset when this employee asks me for help (if I am so stupid, she should not need my help).

    Finally I feel very disillusioned by my boss and the HR rep who at no time attempted to bring order to the proceedings. When I voiced this disappointment to my boss he advised me that he was "sorry" but that these sort of things get nasty. He said if such an incident arose in the future he would do better but in the mean time I need to get over it.

    I now supervise an employee I don't trust and a boss for whom I no longer have any respect. My boss says he wants more comraderie in my section (but I just don't see how I can have a positive relationship with this employee).

    Any advice.? Am I overacting like my boss says? Do I just need to buck up and get over this? How do I deal with these issues with the employee and my boss?

  • Hi, I am starting a new job shortly as Head of Marketing for a tech company. The logical part of my brain knows that they believe I can do the job or they wouldn't have made the offer but another part of me is gripped by imposter syndrome and feel out of my depth. Do any of you have some advice on how to overcome imposter syndrome?

Find Out

What are women saying about your company?

Click Here

Share This

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Share with Friends
  • Share Anonymously

What's Keeping More Women from Being on Boards?

What's Keeping More Women from Being on Boards?

  What’s keeping more women from being on boards? Tenure, among other things. Just 17% of Fortune 500 board seats are held by women ...

 

What’s keeping more women from being on boards? Tenure, among other things. Just 17% of Fortune 500 board seats are held by women, according to 2013 research from Catalyst. And yet, further research from Catalyst has shown that companies with more women directors perform better financially on several dimensions:

- Return on Equity: On average, companies with the highest percentages of women board directors outperformed those with the least by 53 percent.

- Return on Sales: On average, companies with the highest percentages of women board directors outperformed those with the least by 42 percent.

- Return on Invested Capital: On average, companies with the highest percentages of women board directors outperformed those with the least by 66 percent.

Even though causation is difficult to prove, many other studies echo this correlation between higher numbers of women on boards and and improved financial returns. For example, there is research showing diversity help improve decision-making outcomes within groups. So what’s really holding back the appointment of more female directors? There are many factors that cause the deficit of women on corporate boards, including a preference for hiring highly experienced CEO’s and CFO’s, who are by simply virtue of the status quo, more often men. Some have also argued that women’s personal choices and discrimination (both overt and unconscious) play a role.

There is another important factor at play that prevents even the increasing numbers of women with appropriate credentials from taking positions on corporate boards: tenure. According to a recent article in The Wall Street Journal, “At S&P 500 companies, long-tenured directors are common: thirty-six percent had served at least a decade, and more than 400 had held their seats for at least 20 years as of Oct 31.” In other words, low turnover means few board seats become available -- making it difficult to change board composition to include women and minorities.

If more activist shareholders took an interest in reducing term limits for board members, the growth in board diversity could potentially accelerate. But will an increased focus on term limits necessarily lead to more diverse boards? Just last week, for example, when activist shareholders proposed wiping out the Yahoo! board and replacing all of their directors, just two of nine proposed directors were women -- compared to four of nine on the previous board.

One commonly discussed solution to the paucity of women on boards is some sort of quota system. For example, several European countries have experimented with quotas or other public pressure tactics to increase female board representation. However, the efficacy of these tactics has been questioned. One study based on Norway’s quota system requiring that women comprise 40% of public company boards found that the benefits of the new law did not “trickle down” to result in more female managers at those firms or benefit similarly qualified women who were not appointed to boards. Nor did women seem to pursue business careers at any higher frequency as a result. Moreover, many women (and men) recoil at the notion of a quota because it risks tokenism and for fear of cementing unfair stereotypes and biases that women need “help” and are less-than-equally qualified for the roles.

It seems then that there are no silver bullets. When it comes to how to improve the number of women on boards, the problem not only needs to be prioritized, but also needs to be solved via multiple avenues -- board tenure is only one of them.

Fairygodboss

Fairygodboss is committed to improving the workplace and lives of women.
Join us by reviewing your employer!
 

 

thumbnail 1 summary