Half of women sitting on corporate boards of directors around the world support quota systems to fix stubborn gender imbalances in the boardroom, but less than 10 percent of their male colleagues agree, said a study released this week.
Female directors are also more likely than men to approve of term limits and mandatory retirement ages to change corporate board membership, said the survey by Harvard Business School researchers, the WomenCorporateDirectors (WCD) Foundation and Spencer Stuart, a consulting firm.
Asked how they arrived in their board appointments, 39 percent of women said their gender was a significant factor.
Just 1 percent of men said the same, said the survey released on Wednesday.
Men and women were divided as well on the reasons that female board membership remains low, said the survey, which culled responses from more than 4,000 male and female directors from 60 nations.
Male directors, particularly older men, say there is a “lack of qualified female candidates,” it said.
But female directors say diversity is not a board priority and traditional networks tend to be male-dominated, it said.
“It’s often hard to see an informal ‘network’ if you are in the middle of it, but you can see it very clearly when you’re on the outside,” WCD chairwoman Susan Stautberg said in a statement.
Forty-nine percent of female directors supported quotas to promote board diversity, compared to 9 percent of male directors.
Women younger than 55 were more likely than older women to support such quotas, the survey said.
Women hold one in eight corporate board seats worldwide, according to research by the global consulting firm Deloitte, which analyzed board membership in 49 nations.
Board quotas have been set up in several European nations, and a European Commission proposal seeks to make 40 percent of corporate boards female in the next four years.
Among women, more than 40 percent favor government regulations that require boards to disclose the steps they are taking to promote diversity, while just 14 percent of male directors agree, the research by Harvard, WCD and Spencer Stuart found.
By Ellen Wulfhorst
Credit to Thomson Reuters Foundation, the charitable arm of Thomson Reuters, that covers humanitarian news, women’s rights, trafficking, property rights and climate change. Visit news.trust.org
Source: Reuters
An estimated one in seven people in the UK are neurodivergent, yet many struggle to get into jobs or progress in employment. For example, just three in ten of autistic people are in employment, with many of these jobs unstable or below their skill level. In the engineering sector, the call to recognise and harness the unique capabilities of neurodivergent talent has never been more pressing.
A desire from younger workers to earn high salaries early in their careers is a desire based on needs and not wants, data suggests. When asked about the main reasons for compensation increases, 31% said to pay for all their bills and expenses and 25% said to save money for the future.
At a recent training I was facilitating, I invited people to ask me anything anonymously using polling technology. While the questions always give me great insight into where people are struggling with issues of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), this question seemed more universal: “What do I do if my manager is not inclusive?”
