I’m wading back into the issue of women business leaders again, partially because of Ontario’s desire to balance out the boards of directors of companies by requiring public companies to set targets for the number of women in senior roles. But what if women don’t want to be directors and in the C Suite?
I thought of this because of an ad in Thursday’s Globe for Rotman’s Directors Program (Calgary graduation) that showed pictures of graduates and only 11 out of 44 graduates were women. In Toronto it was 12 out of 51. I’m sure the Institute of Corporate Directors doesn’t have a quota on women students so maybe women just aren’t as interested in being directors as men.
Women make up only 37% of admissions to MBA programmes, 24% to EMBA programmes and only 42% to undergraduate business programmes. Maybe women just aren’t as interested in business as men.
However women do make up 48% of law school graduates and 47% of medical school graduates. Maybe women find law and medicine more interesting than business.
Maybe we should stop trying to impose one set of values and demand equality when that is an unrealistic objective.
Many Boards of Directors are voluntary positions. Maybe the Directors Programs’ stats reflect women are choosing to invest in their families and volunteer their available time in that direction more so than men? Not uninterested in business, just a question of priorities.
Cheers, Tom
I agree that it’s a question of priorities but the positions these grads want are paid ones otherwise they wouldn’t be going through such an expensive programme.
Very interesting topic, I had to add my two cents to this one.
It’s just a matter of time before a larger number of women infiltrate the business market. The slow start could be due to a number of things including a lack of initiatives and/or female mentors, or a lack of flexibility in this particular market when it comes to balancing family.
Yet what is more interesting is that when the subject of equality between the sexes comes up work environments tend to focus on quantity, which is the argument around “target” hiring. Quotas may have been a necessity in the 60’s when it was first introduced but now sets women back about 35 years by discrediting their ability to compete. If women and/or minorities are being judged fairly on their character, education, experience and resume, chances are high that you will get a variety of employees that reflect society; if not, then it may be a good idea to look at the character of those doing the hiring. That being said; Although there may only be 11 women out of 44 graduates those women I suspect, took the same classes, used their faculties to interpret the same material, passed the same exams and for their effort were awarded with the same degree as the males in the graduating class, which means when entering the work force they should want and expect to be held to the same standards in every interview, offered the same amount of respect in every boardroom and dare I say, paid the same salary as men. This, I believe, is the more important definition of equality and therefore a very realistic objective and should always be demanded no matter what the numbers are. Those numbers will undoubtedly grow if equality is truly present in the business world.
It will be interesting to see whether these numbers grow. I don’t think that perceived equality will be enough to cause growth as I just don’t think many people are perceiving a career in business to be all that rewarding these days.