The truth is while many of us hope to progress and do better each year, it’s impossible to achieve this if we don’t change. And the same principle definitely applies to the desire to see more diversity in business. If we don’t put steps in place to make this happen, our aims will be fanciful at best.
Personally, I think the current system still needs some work and we likely need to kickstart positive change to ensure it will happen quicker than it has in the past.
That’s why it’s commonplace to see quotas and targets to help rebalance the proportion of females in business. Although the jury is still out around whether it’s the best way, there is no lack of rich debate around this issue.
Quotas v targets?
First we need to clarify the difference between quotas and targets, which are often used interchangeably but serve different purposes. Targets are voluntary, specific measurable objectives set by the organisation, at its own discretion within a set timeframe. And quotas, like targets, are timebound, but are mandatory and generally incur some sort of penalty if they’re not fulfilled.
The Workplace Gender Equality Agency (WGEA) says a disciplined approach can help to provide organisations with the necessary focus to improve gender balance.
But not everyone is on board with this idea. Some say such approaches are little more than window dressing and complying with such enforced rules are patronising and demeaning towards females, because they only create a larger rift between the genders.
So the challenge is, how do we make positive change a priority, but also create a system that isn’t tokenistic?
Diversity and me
I became personally very involved in gender diversity when I started to see young female graduates looking at older women who had been in business 10-20 years. And they felt assured gender discrimination wouldn’t affect them nor would there be any roadblocks inhibiting their success. I recognised that look. I once had it myself.
20 years has passed, it’s hard to say whether much has changed.
Sure our system is shifting to increasing its proportion of females, and I am proud to work for an organisation that will have 50 per cent females in leadership positions this year. So positive change is definitely happening.
More broadly speaking, I think most would agree that it hasn’t happened soon enough.
So what’s the hold up? We can’t put the onus on institutions for not hiring enough females.
Maybe part of it is because females judge themselves on past performance, whereas males judge themselves on future potential. And this certainly affects how ready females feel to tackle new roles.
Females will typically apply for a role only when they tick 100 per cent of the job criteria, whereas males will apply for roles when they hit 60 per cent of the criteria.
So where does that leave us?
Change is uncomfortable. Challenging our status quo is difficult, doing something different takes courage.
If there is no enforced need to change, it’s pretty hard to accept that there will be change.
Change has been slow because there haven’t always been metrics in place to measure our success or otherwise.
But we need more than a focus on the end result, we need guidance to get there. Females want support and need to feel empowered. This is one of the reasons BT created The Stella Network in 2013. And I am proud to lead the network, which now boasts over 2,450 members.
The purpose of the network is to provide a community for males and females to help improve gender diversity in financial advice.
These type of initiatives alongside measurable goals can help to fast-track our path to achieving diversity.
If we want to achieve true diversity there will need to be some change. How do you think we should get there? I’m all ears.
Julia Newbould is a Stella Network Lead at BT Financial Group
I dont believe in any form of discrimination.
Quotas or targets are discrimination cloaked in good intentions and we know where that path usually ends.
We have a larger perentage of females relative to the industry in our business and this is because they see the value we offer and want to be a part of it.
Hunting season – corporate male, grey hair, in 50’s, slightly overweight and struggling with social media while ensuring the balanced score card of diversity, across group collaboration, peer review, community, flexible work place are all ticked !! Shareholder outcome not so important any more !!
Julia, agree with you that more needs to be done and that a kickstart is in order. As you know, I think quotas cause more problems than they solve, however the simple act of measuring your gender diversity and setting a target can bring about rapid and positive change. Stanford Brown now measures gender and ethnic diversity at the company-wide, leadership and adviser level. Our managers know it’s in their KPIs. We will be making public our first gender and ethnic diversity report next month.
So Stanford Brown managers can improve their chances of a bonus by employing a less competent female ahead of a more competent male? If I was a junior male employee at Stanford Brown I’d be looking for a new job at a company where employees are promoted purely on merit.
No one suggests employing a less competent person for a role, we are all in business to be successful, but instead we should be thinking a little more broadly about why so few women are in roles. The system favours status quo. To make a change the way we think about filling roles has to be different. That is the beauty of diversity, having people from different backgrounds who think differently working together to achieve better outcomes.
Maybe not at BT Julia, but Stanford Brown appears to be encouraging the employment of less competent people, through their use “diversity KPIs”. If a manager hasn’t met their “diversity KPI” by employing on merit, how else can they meet it other than by employing a less qualified person with the right diversity genes? If employing on merit delivers diversity anyway (as many will claim), why have a separate KPI for it?
Your comment implies the reason there aren’t more women in roles is because they are generally less capable than their male counterparts. This type of thinking is really the root of the problem.
Lets start with dropping the victim mentality and don’t rely on what gender race or sexual orientation you are to get a promotion . If you are good enough at your job as a salaried employee and feel you are not getting recognition you think you should go out on your own to self employment land where you will soon see if your skills are as good as you think by looking at the bank balance of your company . I should say to all the PC brigade sorry if this comment hurt your feelings
We should get there by continuing to promote equal opportunity and anti discrimination. We should not be promoting quotas, which are essentially just an alternative form of discrimination. Sure, the situation is not perfect yet. Nothing in society is. But it’s much better than it was, and is headed in the right direction. Quotas will undo the positive momentum and goodwill people like you have achieved Julia.