News Archive

UWA Business School
There are very few women in top leadership roles. It's a fact. According to the Business Council of Australia, 10.7% of senior executive positions are held by women, 8.7% of ASX200 companies have female directors, and only 2% of Australian CEOs are women.

Elizabeth Broderick, the Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner, says the situation is unacceptable. ‘Let's be clear - this isn't just a problem, it's a national outrage. Without significant intervention - by government, by business - the number of women progressing in the workplace may shrink even further.'

‘It's kind of absurd,' agrees Winthrop Professor Ray da Silva Rosa, from the UWA Business School. ‘We're losing the expertise of half of our population.'

Da Silva Rosa has just completed a study into the under-representation of women directors on ASX-listed companies. He maintains that the problem is caused by both supply and demand factors.

‘One problem is that women don't put themselves into a position where they're eligible to be considered. Beyond that, there's a myriad or small factors that make it less likely that a woman will become a director of a company.'

So how should these factors be addressed?

One solution is mandatory quotas, the proposition that featured in the recent debate at UWA Business School's Conversations About Women in Leadership. Four panellists - Katie Lahey, Chief Executive, Business Council of Australia (BCA); Kay Goldsworthy, first female Anglican bishop in Australia; James Pearson, CEO, Chamber of Commerce and Industry (WA); and Peter Van Onselen, Associate Professor in Politics and Government, ECU - discussed the effects of quotas.

The debate was introduced and concluded by Professor Tracey Horton, Dean of the UWA Business School. Professor Horton argued that organisations need to change.

‘It's not just a matter of time. Despite organisations having hired large numbers of female graduates for many years, the percentage of women filtering through to senior levels has remained stagnant for more than ten years. That means that businesses are losing a huge proportion of their talent.'

The four panellists agreed that the use of quotas could initially result in ‘tokenistic' appointments. However, they also agreed that quotas would provide a critical mass of women in leadership positions, inspiring future leaders and providing greater networking opportunities for women.

Networking has traditionally been difficult for women. One respondent to a 2009 survey of female directors and chairs of Australian boards by consulting and research firm Hattonneale summarised the predicament:

‘The problem is that women don't have the time to network because they have so many different roles. The men who have been successful often have a wife at home looking after the kids, as well as a personal assistant.'

Additionally, the panel believed that the presence of more women - provided by quotas - would raise awareness of issues that prevent female participation in the workforce. These include safe parking, paid parental leave, and subsidised childcare arrangements. Men would begin talking to other men about these issues, argued Lahey, precipitating a cultural change and meaning that quotas would no longer be necessary.

Elizabeth Broderick believes that the problem of board diversity needs to be addressed urgently. She reminds us that 60% of university graduates are female, and warns that, ‘No country, industry or organisation can afford to waste the skills of more than half its population.'

Of course, it is true that some women choose not to seek promotion - whether for family or other reasons. And that raises whole other issues of childcare and cultural values. But at the top levels, suggests Broderick, we should introduce gender quotas for leadership positions.

From July 2010, there will be changes to the ASX's Corporate Governance Principles. Listed ASX companies will have to include statistics detailing the gender make-up of their boards, senior management and whole organisations in their annual reports. Additionally, they must report on their achievements against gender objectives as set by their boards.

Yet these changes stop short of mandatory quotas. Quotas are a divisive solution, not least amongst the female directors they purport to help. A recent Women on Boards survey of female directors found that just over half of respondents favoured legislated quotas.

Helen Lynch AM, chair of the Westpac Superannuation Fund, expressed the reservations of many women. ‘We all wanted to be promoted on merit, not tick a box for a quota. While it might satisfy some to pay lip service to quotas, it will not change the hearts and minds.'

So given reservations about ‘tokenistic' quotas, could this cultural shift towards board diversity be achieved in another way?

The BCA and the Australian Human Resources Institute (AHRI) have recently launched C-Suite. The 12-month pilot programme will match female businesswomen who show leadership potential with mentor CEOs from companies such as Woolworths, McDonalds, the Commonwealth Bank, Optus and Deloitte.

Graham Bradley, BCA president, says the programme will change leadership cultures. ‘The potential of the scheme goes beyond supporting individual women. It will also facilitate a valuable exchange of views and ideas between mentors and mentees on barriers to workforce participation and promotion.'

While women will not be instantly promoted, they will be listened to and provided with networking opportunities. They can, it is hoped, change organisational cultures. Whether or not this will be as effective as quotas is yet to be seen.

For now, ‘tokenistic' quotas face just as much opposition from female leaders as the male-dominated companies they seek to change. But while Australia is unlikely to introduce mandatory quotas in the near future, this doesn't mean that we can't seek alternative methods of encouraging women in leadership.