Tag: gender and leadership

Categories
General

One Billion Women

For those who don’t follow my tweets ( http://twitter.com/#!/JoanGallos ), this is exciting enough for a full write-up so please read on. [Check me out on Twitter if you want links to the articles reporting the story.]

The world of business and commerce has finally learned what women and micro-finance enterprises (like my personal favorite, the U.S.-based microloan agency called FINCA) have long known: invest in women. Women are reliable (and they repay their loans). They share the fruits of their economic success with their families and communities. Their success drives down illiteracy and mortality rates and supports the education of their children. And, as folks at the Economic Summit in Davos this month reminded us, their nation’s GDP goes up when women’s economic well-being does. Economies that engage women develop more quickly and out-perform those that don’t.

Investing in women is a win-win-win – and these understandings is moving into the boardroom in big ways for what Newsweek recently called “a corporate revolution.”  And I quote:

“Now a corporate revolution is at hand, one that is moving beyond philanthropy, making women partners in business at all levels. . . . On Feb. 1, some of the most powerful companies in the United States (Accenture, Coca-Cola, Ernst and Young, Goldman Sachs, and others) are signing on to a worldwide campaign to bring women into the economic mainstream. The Third Billion Campaign is being launched by La Pietra Coalition – an alliance including corporations, governments, and nonprofits – to enable 1 billion women to become members of the global economy by 2025. The campaign title comes from the notion that over the next decade, the impact of women will be at least as significant as that of China’s and India’s respective 1-billion-plus populations.” (Newsweek, February 6, 2012, p. 12)

Some companies are ahead-of-the-curve on all this. Unilever has had a bottom-of-the-pyramid strategy for years that includes women. It has, for example, invested in 45,000 poor Indian women in 100,000 villages with micro-financing and training supports. In fact, 5% of its current profits in India flow from these efforts. Or Avon has 6 million women in 100 countries running their own small business – the life blood of the corporation. Companies like this demonstrate that bringing women into the economy translates into all the benefits to the women and their communities and families mentioned above – but also increased profits, new markets, better product education for new consumers, and product improvements for the company. It’s smart business to support women entrepreneurs at the grassroots level. Others have now pledged to take up the charge. 

And the Three Billion Campaign doesn’t stop with poor women in developing nations. Data is there to suggest it’s time for companies to address the lack of women in senior leadership and on boards. A recent survey by the New York-based think tank on women and careers Catalyst, for example, found a significant and strong correlation between gender diversity in a company’s leadership ranks and that company’s bottom-line. More women, better results. 

Reading this brought great pleasure. It also took me back to a recent experience, serving on a women in leadership panel with Gloria Steinem. In preparation, I went back and reread some of Steinem’s earlier works (which were so revolutionary at their publication almost half a century ago). I thought about a world where simple consciousness raising seemed shocking to one where some of the largest and most powerful corporations and agencies are pledging significant support — $20 billion, for example, by Walmart – so that 1 billion women will reach their economic potential.  

We have come a long way – and by 2025, will be a giant step closer to a fair and equitable world for men and for women.  Nice!  Very nice!    

Categories
General

For Shame, Forbes: Tarnishing a Gem in the Crown of Social Progress and Gender Equity

As I write, 104,778 people have viewed the Forbes article on the “10 Worst Stereotypes about Powerful Women.”

I’m curious. What did people learn from reading this? And what will they do with this information so that we never have to see another article about this topic again?

If you have been reading my blog this week, you know about mounting evidence of the links among gender, career success, and professional confidence. A quick summary for new readers: you need confidence to succeed!

I fear women will read this article and – tacitly or explicitly – find reasons to doubt that they have the right stuff for leadership and lose more of the confidence they need to craft careers of success and significance. Who wouldn’t if you thought that half the folks around you (and most of the folks in power above you) were still projecting all this old negativity on you?

Men who read the piece can have seeds of doubt planted – or reinforced – about their female co-workers.

In a week when men and women should celebrate another symbolic gem in the crown of social progress and gender equity as IBM appoints its first woman as CEO – Virginia Rometty joins the growing ranks of mega-corporation leaders that now include Ellen Kullman at DuPont, Meg Whitman at Hewlett-Packard, Ursula Burns at Xerox, Indra Nooyi at PepsiCo – 104,778 (and counting) people are having a refresher course on how to dismiss half the world’s population – and hold back progress on a host of fronts for us all.

All the traditional stereotypes are on the Forbes list – and Forbes Online kindly provides a slide show for those who don’t want to read the full article. The slides are a mix of actresses in their portrayal of fictional characters from movies and TV (e.g., Meryl Streep as the “frigid magazine editor” in The Devil Wears Prada and Glenn Close as the “back-stabbing boss” in Damages) with real women who are doing really important work. Each picture represents one of the negative gender stereotypes. Here’s where my blood began to boil.

It includes an unattractive photo of our successful, current Secretary of State (emotional), as well as associations of negativity with the photo of our First Lady (angry), the Head of the International Monetary Fund (masculine), our former Secretary of State (token), the President of Costa Rican (weak), a former Vice Presidential candidate (cheerleader), and the list goes on.

If I thought people were reading this article and standing in outrage that these associations were still happening in the year 2011, I’d feel better. But why do I fear snickers as the pictures of Hillary Clinton and others are passed around the water cooler instead?  And I am not going to even touch the racial issues in all this.

Enough Forbes! Enough media!  Seriously. We need stories that build the confidence and capacities of men and women so that they can bring their full talents to the range of contributions needed to succeed – and for our economy to rebound – in a fast-paced, global world.

Planting seeds of doubt reinforces the very thing this article hoped to counter! 

Categories
General

Leadership, Gender, and Confidence: Another Take

Another take on leadership, gender, and confidence from Jill Flynn, Kathryn Heath, and Mary Davis Holt, authors of the new book, Break Your Own Rules: How to Change the Patterns of Thinking that Block Women’s Paths to Power – and good advice for women and men seeking to increase their impact. 

The book is a fascinating read – and a recommendation that women finally discard the rules that have traditionally guided their leadership (and have been seen as women’s “strengths”). Women are a mere 11% of senior leadership in corporate American, and that number hasn’t changed in 30 years. The authors suggest it’s time to think seriously about how to make that change happen. 

Their advice: out with the old, please, and in with the new.  Reframe the everyday beliefs that women bring about how to lead and do themselves in the workplace.  For example:

Traditional approach: focus on others — New advice: take center stage

Traditional approach: seek approval — New advice: proceed until apprehended

Traditional approach: be modest — New advice: project personal power

Traditional approach: work harder — New advice: be politically savvy

Traditional approach: play it safe — New advice: play to win

Traditional approach: it’s all or nothing — New advice: it’s both-and

I’m not doing he book justice, but I want to get back to the confidence theme from my last post:

In a recent post of the HBR site, the authors assert they found – and “by a wide margin” – that the primary criticism men have about their female colleagues at work is that the women exhibit low self-confidence.

imageThe authors concede this may partly be perception — men can interpret a willingness to share credit or defer judgment as a lack of confidence. But they also note that there is plenty of research that suggests women feel less self-assured at work. See yesterday’s blog post, for one example. Another is a 2011 workforce study by Europe’s Institute of Leadership and Management that reports:

Men were more confident across all age groups: 70% of the men reported high or very high levels of self-confidence, compared to 50% of the women

Half of women managers admitted feelings of self-doubt about their performance and career, 31% of men reported the same

Lack of confidence makes women more cautious in applying for jobs and promotions: 20% of men said they would apply despite only partially meeting its job description, compared to 14% of women.

The authors turned to their own data and identified four specific low-confidence behaviors cited by male and female managers alike:

Being overly modest. Men are more willing to take public credit for their successes. Women believe their accomplishments should speak for themselves. They may – or they may be overlooked by all the busy people around them.

Not asking. Not asking means you’ve lost the chance to get what you need.  No more need be said on that one!

Blending in. The authors note that some women go to great lengths to avoid attention in the workplace. They want to do their work, stay professional, and wait to be appreciated.  A perfect strategy for remaining invisible!

Remaining silent. Don’t speak up and you won’t get in the conversation – or the game.

The author’s conclusion: Career momentum is not just about adding job skills. It’s about changing everyday thinking and behaviors.  Amen! 

Glad I could bring you these helpful insights. I ask you to share them – and this blog site – with others interested in improving their leadership.  I’d love to attract more readers – and I have plenty more to say about how to lead and how to lead for greater impact.

So how am I doing?  I’m practicing the suggested new behaviors!  Are you?

Categories
General

Women need to see themselves in a role before they can succeed

An article in today’s Chronicle of Higher Education confirms what those who have studied gender and leadership know from research — and what many women know from personal experience: women need to be able to see themselves in a role before they can succeed in it.

I assert the same is true for people of color and for first generation college graduates.  

If people can’t believe at their core that folks like them can do whatever they are setting out to do, that tiny kernel of insecurity can gnaw at their self-confidence. And guess what? They may not be able to do what they fear they can’t. It’s a tacit, self-fulfilling prophecy.

The message to educators in all this is clear: teaching skills and knowledge is not enough. Quality education is identify work and personal development, and we short change our students – undergraduates, graduate students, and executive audiences – when we design programs assuming facts, figures, and models are enough. We do students no service either when we think we know why they don’t succeed or persist.

Look at what the researchers found.

Research from Stanford’s Clayman Institute for Gender Research in the October issue of the American Sociological Review found that women who begin college intending to become engineers are more likely than men to change their major and choose another career. The interesting gender twist: they do it for lack of confidence, not competence.

Women lack what the researchers call "professional role confidence" — a term that loosely describes the outcome of a complex self-assessment on whether a person feels s/he has the right stuff for success: the core intellectual skills, the right expertise for a given profession, and a fit in interests and values with the expectations of the field’s career path.

Women’s family plans and concerns about their math skills have been traditional explanations for their low representation in engineering. The researchers, however, found otherwise.

Women’s family plans had little bearing on their career planning once they entered engineering training. Surprisingly, men were more likely to leave engineering if they had plans to start a family.

Women’s views of their math abilities were not significant predictors of persistence toward an engineering degree or entrance into the field. "Once students matriculate into this math-intensive field, more complex, profession-specific self-assessments appear to replace math self-assessment as the driving social-psychological reasons for attrition," the researchers concluded.

The authors suggest their findings about professional-role confidence may be relevant in other fields. I know they are. That’s why mentors, role models, and caring sponsors are so important.