2016: Year in Review: How to Move Forward From Here For Gender Parity at Work and Fairness in Society

, ,

By Nicki Gilmour, CEO and Founder of theglasshammer

Nicki Gilmour - Founder of The Glasshammer.comTo review 2016 in context of women at work and the progress being made for professional women has been like a textbook case study for me as an organizational psychologist who works in diversity. I hope I can share with you how we can go forward and change the way we do this work. It is obvious that there is work to do and yet I am so incredibly anxious of the capacity of most people to ensure this moment is a launching pad for real progress and not the moment that we spiral down and turn the clock back thirty to hundred years. It truly could go either way. Progress is everyone’s responsibility to take and accountability has to be there- change starts here.

Recap the past ten years (see here for 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011, 2010 Year End reviews for a macro, multi-year view) to see how things aren’t changing over a fair time period. In one sentence, progress for women’s equality at work, based on promotional and pay parity for same work done and all things being equal, is just not there. This year, hasn’t seen much progress either and the fact is at board level there are no more women in board seats than there were ten years ago, unless mandated by quotas seen with an increase in countries that have a mandate in place (i.e. not USA). Senior management figure changes aren’t all that either and most women (and men) will tell you that they are working harder than ever.

A striking research piece of evidence is seen here in the 2016 PWC’s Annual Corporate Directors Report which includes responses from 884 public company directors, 83% of whom are male and 17% of whom are female. Overall, the findings state that 97% of respondents who think female board representation should be between zero and twenty percent were male board members. Worth noting, 3% of those who think that are female board members themselves. Then, the survey shows about a quarter of respondents said they believe there are a significant number of qualified diverse candidates out there with 93% of female directors saying that they at least “somewhat” believe that there plenty of qualified non-male, non-white candidates out there. “Somewhat” is not exactly resoundingly confident is it? And that implies that everyone thinks that there is an abundance of male candidates that are entirely ready for a board because somebody sits in these seats. I hate to tell you folks but we are all still holding up this blind spot of perceiving men to be more ready for leadership by virtue of being a man only. The emotions and desires driving “facts” are that maybe people want men in leadership roles because I have mentioned many times, women can be as equally sexist as men and sometimes even more so for many reasons including securing their own place in the pack.

How do we really create a meritocracy?

Do people want meritocracy? I do not believe all people do want meritocracy as the results of the US election show with 61% of white women who voted in the US election deciding that they do not want equal pay for the same work done as the man beside them and other actual policies that impact them directly. Then, these same women are turning a blind eye to sexism, sexual assault, racism and homophobia in some effort to believe that they do not rate basic protections of themselves and others as highly as other things. Except, what are these other things? Because upon examination there are no other things. It is not economic stability that is being sought and it doesn’t take a psychologist to tell you, it is the status quo of the white patriarchy that is being maintained by the very group best placed to disrupt it.

Do you think these women will ensure you do not have barriers at work if they believe that they deserve them for themselves in life? You tell me? Why does this happen? Why do “good people” do things that have a serious negative impact on other humans directly and knowingly? Look for your own cognitive dissonance and address the nuances in your behaviors that make you feel better but actually make you favor men over women as leaders and experts. What is cognitive dissonance? It is when you have a value or a belief and then you do something that doesn’t line up with that belief or you hold conflicting beliefs and feel that you need to align them. For example, you are against drink driving as a value but drive home from your holiday party drunk. You didn’t like this action or thought so then, you try to reduce the dissonance by devaluing the item, action or person and in this case like saying, “It was only a straight road for one mile and I only had two drinks, I was fine”. In reality, your belief is cancelled out by your actions that you then justify. We all do this but if you truly want to be an inclusive, fair champion of a level playing field for yourself, women, LGBT and people of color at work then turn the mirror towards yourself for a second because you can stop this process and you can live your diversity and inclusion values just as you don’t have to drive drunk.

Much like the research that I mention frequently called “Think Manager, Think Male” where men and women constantly rank male managers (as a group, not known individuals) as more competent, productive, stable, is your brain playing tricks on you. It is what you have been socio-conditioned to believe in part so of course this work of undoing all your paradigms and “what you Granny told you”, is not going to be easy.

For those who do want meritocratic conditions what will 2017 hold?

I think there are several things we can do as people reading this to move the needle for gender parity and general fairness to everyone. Also, from a career perspective you can choose your path, do not forget that!

Firstly, work for good companies who work hard at systems and culture to ensure an inclusive, progressive culture. Signs to look for when picking a company to work for are women at the top, middle and everywhere else. Good policies around families with men taking advantage of these policies and not just women as this will mean it’s not a one- gender policy in practice. Healthy, happy people and fair and clear talent systems are a must. It is not a coincidence if there are literally no LGBT or people of color working there. It is not a coincidence if women are not in the middle or top of the house. Look for great leaders who do what they say they will do and have a value set that shows that they value you and all that you can bring to work, such as Lloyd Blankfein at Goldman Sachs when he made his marriage equality video. PWC’s Bob Moritz and Denis McNally have both walked the talk on promoting women to the highest positions in the firm. Accenture’s Pierre Nanterme has shown a lot of commitment to parity and is now involved in the newly formed Paradigm4Parity group. Watch leaders make their beliefs for equality translate through the firm in lived values by themselves paying more than lip service.

Secondly, keep it human. Tell your stories to help the people around you understand what diversity and multiple realities look like. Jennifer Brown, a colleague, competitor and comrade in arms to the mission as well CEO and author of her new book “ Inclusion: Diversity, the New Work Place and the Will to Change” puts it nicely,

When we share our diversity stories, it draws others to us who are looking for leaders who understand, who have paid attention, and who show their commitment to valuing diversity and creating an inclusive space around them where everyone can bring more of their full selves to their careers.

At least it is on the table, we know sexism is still here

Although it is bittersweet and mostly horrible to have such a fascinating case study of 2016 to show the lack of progress, at least it’s now issues are undeniably on the table. As Sophie Walker, Head of the Equality Party in the UK stated recently on the topic of new Prime Minister Theresa May doing nothing so far for gender parity, “At least now we don’t have to debate if misogyny exists. We don’t have to debate sexism,” she said. “I’m so used to starting interviews with people who begin by saying, ‘women are equal, come come, there isn’t a problem’.
Anyone who has any grasp on this can agree that 2016 has explicitly shown us, there is a problem.

It is not easy to understand why Teresa May is making little effort to advance women in the UK. Like many female leaders, there is often a strong need to reject such issues to gain credibility if the system and all the players are men and historically masculine behavior is rewarded. Assimilation can often be the only strategy, sadly. Vicious circle this sexism business, eh?

My advice to you is to see things for what they are and if you cannot, then go deeper, do the work to evolve and make the decision if you are a status quo protector or a change agent. Own it. Do not tell me you want to lean in and advance and then constantly make sure that you reinforce gender stereotypes and maintain barriers and biases for yourself and others. It simply is tedious otherwise to go through the motions because I cannot help you, if you cannot help yourself. I see a lot of people being a part of the problem, somewhat unconsciously to be fair and it is all of our jobs to change society, to be fair and kind. Involve the men on a very real level. Identify your male gender champions, they are usually the smart guys who see the business and human value of this equality stuff such as my new friend Adam Quinton or the guys at our Engaging Men event. Your job starts with educating your boys and breaking toxic assumptions of how it is to be a man. Empower your girls and break gender role stereotypes from day one.

Make 2017 a good one.

Happy Holidays from me and theglasshammer team

/by

The Top 10 Graduate Employers For Women

,
The top 10 graduate employers for women

Image via Shutterstock

Despite continuing advances in gender equality in the workplace and beyond, there’s a reason conversations about the issue continue: female graduates still face some disadvantages in the jobs market.

Recent reports have revealed the extent to which the gender pay gap still exists, and the difference can be seen between male and female graduates’ starting salaries. Data published in 2015 showed that twice as many men earn between £30,000-£40,000 than women, and that the median salary for female graduates was £1,000 less than that of males. And the level of women in senior management positions and on company boards is still proportionally lower across the workforce than that of men.

So there are plenty of reasons to apply to a company that is taking active steps to achieve true gender equality and diversity in the workplace, but which of them also offer good opportunities at graduate level?

We’ve put together this list by cross-referencing the most recent editions of The Times Top 100 Graduate Employers and The Times Top 50 Employers for Women. And as there are 30 employers that make both lists, we narrowed it down by looking at where they placed on the Guardian’s UK 300 – a ranking of which employers graduates most want to work for.

The Big Four (professional services)

It may be a cheat to include 4 employers in one, but all of the UK’s leading professional services firms – Deloitte, KPMG, PwC, and EY – performed well in the rankings, and between them planned to hire around 5,100 graduates in 2016.

The 2015-16 Graduate Employers list saw PwC top the table for the twelfth year in a row. Its graduate scheme is built upon strong foundations of mentoring, training, development, and support. And though it’s biggest base is in London, there are 29 locations across the UK that graduates can join. The firm also runs a high potential female development programme, Breakthrough, and sets gender and ethnicity targets for each grade pool.

Deloitte, KPMG, and EY also all rank within the top ten graduate employers, and have been recognised for their commitment to gender equality in the workplace, and for running a variety of schemes and programmes to help women maximise their potential. EY’s Managing Partner for Talent in the UK and Ireland, Liz Bingham, stressed the importance of an approach that encompasses the entire workforce, improving diversity ‘from graduate entry to the boardroom’.

Deloitte has also chosen to publically engage with the problem of the gender pay gap, reporting its own average wage gaps across the company and at each grade; the firm is determined to balance the numbers and has set new targets for women in senior positions.

MI5 (public service)

A far cry from the popular media image of the gentleman spy – white, male, private school and Oxbridge educated – the Secret Service is actually well recognised for its commitment to diversity.

As well as establishing itself as a top employer for women and taking strides in employing Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic staff, MI5 was named Employer of the Year 2016 in Stonewall’s list of best employers for LGBT staff. Staff of all gender identities and sexual orientations are recruited and work in every area of the organisation.

The Service recruits around 80 graduates, who can expect to earn between £28,500-£30,000 at entry level, who join graduate programmes for Intelligence Officers and Intelligence Data Analysts.

Unilever (consumer goods)

Unilever UK has 40 brands covering a variety of commodities, from soup to soap. The employer recruits 50 graduates at starting salaries of £30,000 to its Management and Development programme. It also employs another 50 or so students on industrial or summer placements.

The company demonstrates internal commitment to and external promotion of gender equality; at the Business in the Community Workplace Gender Equality Awards it received the Female FTSE 100 Award, which recognises the affiliate organisation with the most women on its board.

JP Morgan (financial services)

Rising to 14th place in the Top Graduate Employers list, JP Morgan is the first global finance firm to achieve such a high ranking. Although it has no set graduate recruitment targets, the bank hires several graduate analysts on competitive salaries each year, and many of these are recruited straight out of its competitive internship programmes. Developing junior talent is considered vital.

Globally, the firm is dedicated to creating a positive culture for people from diverse backgrounds, and in the USA 55% of representatives are female. As well as promoting equality in the workplace, JP Morgan has also contributed to external projects aimed at helping women. For instance, the bank partnered with the Cherie Blair Foundation for Women in 2014 to help female entrepreneurs in the United Arab Emirates, and hosted a discussion panel during Women’s History Month.

Goldman Sachs (financial services)

Goldman Sachs recruits around 400 graduates to join its New Analyst and New Associate Programmes. The programmes aim at helping graduates develop and become integrated members of the team, with access to several mentoring and training opportunities.

Amongst the bank’s policies promoting equality are its efforts to reach out to female undergraduates and sixth-formers in an attempt to encourage more women to go into what is still sometimes stereotyped as a male dominated culture. Efforts are also being made to promote more women into senior roles, both to further their careers and to create a greater number of female role models for entry-level women to look up to.

The bank also launched ‘10,000 Women’ in 2008, an initiative aimed at helping female entrepreneurs worldwide.

IBM UK (IT and telecommunications)

The IT company makes a concerted effort to reach out to girls at every stage of their education, running a Schools’ Outreach Programme, and even holding an annual ‘Take Our Daughters to Work’ day. There are also several initiatives aimed at supporting women in the company; globally, the firm has over 220 networking groups and over 50 of these are for women. In fact, the company’s website includes a section dedicated to the women of IBM.

It planned an intake of over 300 graduates, at salaries of £30,000 or more. Graduate hires also have access to the company’s generous benefits packages, ranging from travel insurance to a discount bicycle scheme.

Shell (oil and gas)

Shell’s recruitment target was between 80-100 graduates, on salaries of £32,500. Graduates can join the Commercial, Technical, or Corporate Function areas, and receive full training to ready them for on-going advancement in the company.

Shell aims to support equality and diversity at each stage of the employee life-cycle. Its recruitment programme looks to hire graduates from diverse backgrounds. The company has introduced a shared parental leave policy that matches their maternity leave policy. It also boasts several employee led diversity and inclusion networks, as well as development and mentoring schemes.

However, given the company layoffs that occurred early in 2016 in the face of weakened oil prices, this may not be the most secure industry to go into at the moment.

Procter and Gamble (consumer goods)

P&G onboards around 100 graduates in the UK at salaries of £30,000. Although the focus is on-the-job training – with graduates given responsibility from the start – the company encourages graduates to take training courses that are developed with external partners.

A driven approach to staff development has led P&G to achieve gender neutrality in the areas of sales, finance, and marketing. Most importantly, the UK leadership team is also balanced, with 8 men and 7 women in the most senior positions.

Microsoft (technology)

Recruiting 36 graduates on salaries of £34,700, roles at the tech giant are highly sought after. Graduates join the Microsoft Academy for College Hires (MACH) scheme, developing skills for a career in marketing, technology, or sales.

As well as seeking to encourage women to pursue careers in technology, and promoting women’s networks through such features as their separate women’s Facebook page, Microsoft has also launched an innovative internal strategy to drive inclusion. All employees are expected to complete a course on Unconscious Bias Training, encouraging both men and women to break down traditional gender barriers.

By expecting everybody to change their behaviours and to create an inclusive culture, Microsoft aims to build a truly equal workplace.

BAE Systems (engineering and industrial)

The 350 or more graduates joining BAE Systems can look forwards to salaries of £25,000 and up, and benefits that can include a £2,000 welcome bonus. Schemes include the Graduate Framework Programme (2 years), the Finance Leader Development Programme (5 years), and the Sigma Leadership Programme (3 years).

BAE Systems has taken a stand against all forms of bullying and inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, signing the ‘No Bystanders’ pledge to take action against all such behaviours. It also uses a Diversity and Inclusion Matrix to track their progress in this matter – from a business that meets regulatory requirements to one that recognises diversity as a boost to their performance levels.

Claire Kilroy is a content writer for the UK’s leading graduate recruitment agency, Inspiring Interns. Check out their website if you’re on the hunt for internships or graduate jobs London.

/by

2016 Did Not Go The Way You Planned? Plan a Stellar 2017

,

Hello 2017

By Nicki Gilmour, Executive Coach and Organizational Psychologist

As the year draws to a close this December, it is a good time in all the holiday madness to do some reflection at the end of a busy and often surprising year for many.

What has gone well for you this year? What would you do differently? How would you do it again?

It can be useful to do an “after action review” of some of the interactions and situations that occurred for you in your home and work life to see what you have learned. We cannot change some of the outcomes, but two things are under our control, how we react to what has been handed to us and secondly what behaviorally we will do different in the hope of different outcomes in 2017.

If you did not get the job you wanted this year, even if you were truly ready for it then it is worthwhile to understand which parts where truly down to you (skills, traits, behaviors and even take a hard and honest look at mistakes) and what was really not to do with you. What do I mean by that? Simply put, culture and trends, was the country, firm or team trending in a certain way? Always understand the external environment that you are operating in. Secondly, did others have false perceptions about who you are or what you are capable of? Understand what is really you and what is imagined about you and then try your best to close that gap positively and navigate the rest of it as gracefully as possible.

Lastly, make sure the system is not flawed and that meritocratic processes are in place so that a clear and fair promotional criteria will reward those who deserve the job.

It is not lost on me that while writing this advice to you that politics does not abide by these rules, but I am confident that good firms do, so as Goethe said ” Choose wisely, your choices are brief but endless.” My advice for reviewing 2016 and planning for 2017 is exactly that.

If you are interested in hiring an Executive Coach to help you navigate your career then please contact nicki@glasshammer2.wpengine.com for a no obligation chat to discuss options

/by

Why Leaders Need More than Mirror Reflections

,

female-leaders-looking-in-her-mirror-reflection-featuredBy Aimee Hansen

Amidst increasing access to a broader worldview, we are paradoxically retreating into narrowing, amplified, separated tunnels of perspective.

One of the clearest examples is the side-by-side blue feed, red feed posted by The Wall Street Journal. These views are never side-by-side but rather constructions of completely different realities.

Social media (with Facebook at top) is a news source for 62% of U.S. adults, and when our Facebook newsfeed is increasingly a tunnel lined with mirrors, the sum reflection is silos of distortion.

Diversity of thought is a muscle that is essential to leadership, and one that we may be getting weaker at flexing when it comes to developing our worldview in our personal and societal lives. Whatever we practice, we become better at. So arguably, we are getting better at listening to people who think like we already do.

To be effective leaders, we have to increasingly be more vigilant about the practice of inviting diversity of thought in, even when it’s difficult to do so.

How Facebook Is Narrowing Our Feedback Loop

As highlighted in the The New York Times, it’s our interaction with social media that both biases and narrows our exposure to different viewpoints and different stories.

Frank Bruni writes, “The Internet isn’t rigged to give us right or left, conservative or liberal — at least not until we rig it that way. It’s designed to give us more of the same, whatever that same is: one sustained note from the vast and varied music that it holds, one redundant fragrance from a garden of infinite possibility.”

When our ideas and perspectives are not challenged, but only reinforced by our customized curation of news through interaction with social media,“we retreat into enclaves of the like-minded” with increased speed and depth, while missing out on a breadth of perspectives.

According to the NYT, “Technology makes it much easier for us to connect to people who share some single common interest,” said author Marc Dunkelman (“The Vanishing Neighbor”), and easier to avoid “face-to-face interactions with diverse ideas.”

According to network scientist, Vyacheslav Polonski writing for the World Economic Forum, previous research has shown that increased contact with people who share our previously held beliefs makes those beliefs more extreme.

We become more confident, vigorous, and emboldened as we begin to adopt a new group identity. At the same time, we becoming increasingly ignorant to the dynamics of alternative world views. There is both power and peril.

Confirming Our Own Biases

According to The Guardian, “Since online content is often curated to fit our preferences, interests and personality, the internet can even enhance our existing biases and undermine our motivation to learn new things.”

One bias that is supported by echo chambers is confirmation bias, where we look to see our own preconceptions confirmed rather than fully taking facts, data, or opposing viewpoints into consideration. We are drawn to prove ourselves right by consuming information that matches our opinions even though “being exposed to conflicting views tends to reduce prejudice and enhance creative thinking.”

As Warren Buffet said, “What the human being is best at doing is interpreting all new information so that their prior conclusions remain intact.” With too much information to deal with, it’s a survival strategy to ignore most of it, but we tend to selectively ignore what does not agree with us.

The Boardroom Echo Chamber

If we want to know more about the dangers of decision-making inside of a (digital) echo chamber, we can look to the corporate boardroom, because that has existed mostly as an echo chamber for decades.

In 2015, Fortune 500 companies filled 399 vacant or newly created seats, the highest number of seats since Heidrick & Struggles began tracking. But when faced with a record opportunity to increase diversity, the Fortune 500 boardroom stuck to its own kind.

Tapping from the “usual suspects” (73% of appointments were current and former CEOs and CFOs), the range of industry backgrounds narrowed, women appointments stalled, Latino appointments remained flat, and Asian-American appointments fell. The only improvements in diversity were African-American (1% point) and international experience (32.2% points).

In sum, older white male seats or new seats were filled with older white males with international experience. From the perspective of social diversity, boards elected more mirrors to reflect similar viewpoints, not more windows to bring in diverse perspectives.

Diversity Makes Us Smarter

According to the Harvard Business Review, the key differentiator of leadership (and the career arc of a leader) is a process of inclusiveness in decision making, the ability to take into account a 360 degree context.

Underlining the importance of gathering multiple perspectives, Associate Professor Laurence Minksy and Julia Tang Peters write, “Habitual outreach prevents insular thinking, opens doors to ideas and collaborative relationships, expands problem-solving perspectives, and increases the range of resources for implementation.”

As reiterated by Scientific American, social diversity enhances creativity, encourages the search for novel perspectives, and leads to better decision-making and problem solving. Katherine W. Phillips, a Paul Calello Professor of Leadership and Ethics, writes, “Simply interacting with individuals who are different forces group members to prepare better, to anticipate alternative viewpoints and to expect that reaching consensus will take effort.”

“Being with similar others leads us to think we all hold the same information and share the same perspective,” writes Phillips. This keeps us from effectively processing information, and hinders creativity and innovation. Whereas in a context of diversity, we are less complacent with our perspectives and begin to consider alternatives even before personal interaction takes place.

“Simply adding social diversity to a group makes people believe that differences of perspective might exist among them and that belief makes people change their behavior,” writes Phillips. We work harder on both a cognitive and social level, become more diligent, and more open-minded because we anticipate it will take more to come to a consensus.

Also, disagreement with those who are socially different to us also does more to spark our consideration.

“When we hear dissent from someone who is different from us (eg. by race or political party), it provokes more thought than when it comes from someone who looks like us,“ writes Phillips. “When disagreement comes from a socially different person, we are prompted to work harder. Diversity jolts us into cognitive action in ways that homogeneity simply does not.”

Your Diversity Muscle

As Phillips points out, diversity of thought is a muscle we have to exercise. “You have to push yourself to grow your muscles.”

So as a leader, ask yourself where are you allowing yourself to be drawn into an echo chamber? Are you being inclusive in your own decision-making?

And, where in your workplace do you see a tunnel of mirrors in need of some windows?

/by

Time Gaps in your Resume? Turn Black Holes into Wins

, ,

CV / ResumeGuest Contributed By Sharon Nir

Recruiters and hiring managers have unconscious and conscious bias and judgement based on employment intervals can be one of the greatest organizational impediments for success.

But if organizations attempted to understand black holes in employee resume the way astrophysicists strive to understand black holes in the universe, they could uncover concealed information about candidates that could prove valuable for the position, but might not be attained through interview, questionnaire or psychological assessment. Therefore, instead of distracting interviewers away from employment gaps, interviewees should pull future employers right into them.

Show you’re a good match

Many valuable organizational resources are consumed during the hiring process; therefore, organizations do their best to find the most promising candidates. One approach to an applicant’s assessment is based on the concept of “fit”. Three different types of “fit” exist— the first two are relatively easy to attain, the third is legendary. A person-organization fit is focused on how well an individual “fits” within the organizational culture. A person-job fit is focused on how well an individual “suits” the job he or she is hired to do in two aspects: personality and skills. The legendary option is the combination of the two in which a candidate demonstrates both organizational and job fit.

Candidate’s evaluation based on the level of “fit” is essential, because in many cases, it predicts the future success of the recruitment. In this context, the employers’ tendency to mind the gap could be explained by their look for “fitted” employees, which in their opinion translates to well-planned, long-term objectives achieved by following a gap-free career path. Additionally, employment gaps predominantly create a big question mark, and most organizations do everything they possibly can to avoid any kind of ambiguity. Therefore, the candidates have the responsibility to replace question marks with exclamation points and prove they are a perfect match for both the job and the organization.

Before you apply for a position, perform a thorough study of the company’s mindset. On the website, focus on the mission statement, values, and social responsibility initiatives or activities. Sign up for the company’s newsletter, which is a great resource for learning about the organizational culture, latest news, and employees’ appreciation. Additionally, search for recent articles about the company.

Then go back to your resume and elaborate about previous positions that are aligned with the organizational culture, mission, and social responsibility commitment at the expense of positions that are not. In the cover letter, explain how the skills and the experience you’ve gained during your employment gap would come in handy in the position for which you are applying. During the interview, gravitate the conversation towards the black holes and give specific examples of the way your core competencies, which you’ve acquired throughout the gap period can be valuable to the organization.

The past counts but the future is pertinent

The 21st century’s lifestyle dictates modifications. Gone are the days when people worked from nine-to-five, were mostly involved in physical labor, and remained in the same work place for forty years. Today, we live in a fast-paced, ever-changing business environment that promotes employment mobility and career transformations. In such eco-systems, employment gaps could be one of the best predictors of employees’ growth and future successes, because like in the universe, black holes exhibit a strong gravitational pull that could help evaluate candidates’ personalities beneficial to the position and the organization.

If you are an educated, skilled professional with employment gaps, you could contribute more to organizations than a similar candidate without gaps. You are the employee any smart forward-thinking organization would like to have. You are a curious, creative, risk-taking, self-directed, adaptive, agile, and adjustable individual who may exhibit unique problem-solving skills, which are powered by a situation analysis and a complex decision-making process.

The fact a skilled technical writer took off a year or two to write her debut novel and DJ-ed on the weekends to support her family presents a candidate who is responsible, creative, and dedicated to her mission. If an IT project manager traded her career for her family for a few years that should suggest she has her priorities straight, possesses a high-risk tolerance, and follows her values and beliefs. A successful art teacher in her 40s who took off a few years and returned to school to study architecture should give a clue this candidate has a vision, and she is unwilling to settle for anything less than what she can achieve.

Candidates with these exclusive core competencies are the catalysts of innovation and growth. They are organizations’ most-prized possessions, and most likely, they would be the ones to help the organization achieve and sustain the competitive advantage. Therefore, stop feeling inferior and instead display pride, and show you’re the organization’s legendary option as you fit both the job and the organization due to your unusual or creative career path.

A word to employers

Employers should keep in mind that hiring a candidate with employment intervals is anything but compromising. Important to remember is that a candidate with years of work experience from which she didn’t take on growth challenges is worthless to the organization, while a candidate with a modest experience from which she evolved and changed is invaluable.

Sharon NirAbout the author

Sharon Nir is the author of The Opposite of Comfortable: The Unlikely Choices of a Career Immigrant Woman (Viki Press/May 2016). Born in Tel Aviv, Israel, she holds a Bachelor of Art degree in Language and Literature from Tel Aviv University, and an MBA in Marketing and International Management from Northeastern University of Massachusetts. Sharon, her husband and two children reside in Albuquerque, New Mexico. Visit sharonnir.com and connect @sharonvnir and facebook.com/sharonvnir for more info.

Save

/by

‘Surround Yourself’ with Guys Who Get It!

Business meeting with women and menGuest Contributed by Rayona Sharpnack

We have only to watch the progress of the U.S. presidential campaign to understand that bias (against any underdog group) and bullying are contagious. But so, in my belief, are courage, integrity, and commitment as demonstrated by the male professional athletes who have stood up to say, “not in my locker room!”

In these days fraught with public statements about women as sex objects, as inferiors, as people easily dissed and dismissed, we need to consciously refocus our attention on men who respect and value us. Even more, we need to think and talk widely about the corporate and government leaders who champion women and our achievements.

This is not only to keep our own spirits up, but to have an impact on the young men around us, especially those in our families. A variety of research has shown that boys, more so than girls, are particularly sensitive to social influences and role models. With the powerfully negative male role-modeling broadcast daily from the campaign trail, we owe it to our boys to show them men with positive attitudes toward women.

Where to find them? On an international level, you can start with President Obama’s “This is what a feminist looks like” moment and Justin Trudeau’s now-famous answer to the question of why 50% of his cabinet is female.

Our partner, theglasshammer also has been an inspiring place to see a series of articles on individual “Men Who Get It.” There are good guys out there, young and old and male MBA students who have chosen to support gender equality and take what they’ve learned into the companies they are going to work for can be seen on the Forté Foundation’s page on Men Making a Difference.

Dr. Michael Kimmel also gives a worthwhile TED talk showing that men who support gender equity will be happier, healthier, and even more sexually satisfied. And he does it with panache and humor!

We are hosting Guys Who Get It Awards, a celebration luncheon in San Francisco on Jan. 26, 2017, to acknowledge the vision and leadership of C-level executive men from Fortune 500 companies who really “get it” about Gender Partnership™. We will be honoring male leaders from across industries and government to showcase that such partnership is not only possible, but is already being achieved by these executives with great results. (Each award-winner has at least 35% women on his leadership team.) Attendees will learn about their best practices and how these “guys who get it” are working to establish gender equality as a cultural norm within their organizations – or their city. (One of our winners is the mayor of a major U.S. city.) We hope you can join us there!

Rayona Sharpnack is CEO and founder of the Institute for Gender Partnership and the Institute for Women’s Leadership

/by

Giving Season: Make Your Donation Dollars Go Further

,

money talks

By Aimee Hansen

As #GivingTuesday approaches on November 29th and Giving Season kicks off, are you making the most of your donation dollars?

During the last six weeks of the year, up to 40% of all charitable donations are made ($373 billion in 2015). Individuals are reported to contribute 72% of all total giving that nonprofit organizations receive.

Though strategy is a big part of our professional lives, when it comes to giving, many of us tend to be far more reactive than strategic.

“Most people spend more time researching a new recipe online than they do a charity to give to,” say Eileen Heisman, CEO of National Philanthropic Trust. We spoke with Heisman about how to make your giving dollars go further this year.

Set A Giving Budget

It’s helpful to set a general giving budget – for example 1%-12% of income, although any donation is significant.

“One of the many benefits to a budget,” Heisman notes, “is that it empowers you to decline impulsive requests from co-workers and friends now and throughout the year.”

If you’re serious about philanthropy, she recommends to go beyond only reacting to asks and get invested: “take stock of what you think is important in your life.”

Find Out What Matters to You

“You need to make it manageable: what are the three causes that are really important to me in my life?” Do you want to make impact on a national, local, or international level? What causes matter most to you? Girls’ education? Supporting local initiatives in impoverished countries? Inner city opportunities?

One idea is to involve your children in this discussion, asking them to research and propose charity ideas to you, while increasing their own social awareness.

Select Organizations Active In That Area

Heisman advises that for each area you wish to support, “You can find three or four organizations and then narrow it down and pick one.” Some people prefer start-ups, others prefer big organizations. “You have to know who you are as a donor.”

One insider tip is to look at which organizations have big institutional funders (Gates, Rockefeller, Ford), because these entities have been carefully vetted, which is akin to a credibility endorsement.

You are also able to access an organizations 990, read newspaper articles, look at annual reports, and check out the board. Avoid scams by donating online (never on phone), such as at the charity’s website, and/or confirming the organization is a registered 501c3 at IRS.gov.

If it’s important to you, be aware that “just because it’s on GoFundMe doesn’t mean it’s a charitable gift.” Not all donations are tax-deductive, so confirm if it matters.

Check Your Overhead Bias

“I think there’s been a demonization of overhead that’s been really unfortunate in the sector over the past decade.” says Heisman. “You need overhead.”

She points out that overhead includes staff training and development, technology and resources, program strategy and development, impact evaluation – collecting data, crunching numbers, generating reports.

“Research and development, which most charities don’t have, is a normal part of overhead in most for-profit organizations. Most professional women would realize,” says Heisman, “when they see the categories that fall under overhead, that those are things that need to thrive to have a healthy organization.”

“If you really love an organization and think it’s well run,” she recommends, “give them an unrestricted gift and allow them to spend it on what they think is the most important thing for them, because you’re also investing in leadership.”

When you give an earmarked gift, it can keep a charity from being able to optimize their resources to meet their needs. Giving an unrestricted donation demonstrates that you are behind the mission and the leadership.

Build A Relationship

“If you have $1000 to give away, instead of giving it away to ten charities for $100, pick four charities and give $250 each,” advises Heisman. “Larger gifts to fewer charities creates bigger impact.”

Heisman suggests to pick three focus areas and one charitable organization in each area. Also, it’s expensive for a charity to find donors, so it’s better to build continuity.

“Stick with those entities for a while. Number one, it will save you time. But also, it takes a while to achieve goals in the social sector. They can’t turn a problem around in a year.”

Many charities have excellent dashboards and general reports available about their program impact. If you are a high value donor (eg. $5,000 or more), only then should you ask for a special report.

“I think donors are usually driven by the heart and emotional reasons,” says Heisman,“ but what often keeps donors connected is knowing the nonprofit is doing a good job at trying to address that issue.”

Leverage Giving Technology To Make It Easy

These sites can be very helpful in easily navigating the giving landscape:

Global Giving – This site is “the first and largest global crowdfunding community that connects nonprofits, donors, and companies in nearly every country around the world,” helping resources reach locally-based nonprofits.

Network for Good – Find charities easily, keep a track record of your donations, and make last minute (literally) giving for year-end deductions.

Small Token – Easily and quickly give a gift to a friend or family member by making a donation on their behalf.

Kiva – Through this micro-lending site, provide a loan to your choice of many domestic and global projects, and you can choose to re-gift your loan when you receive repayment.

Donors Choose – Choose a public school project and help teachers to bring their classroom dreams to life.

Heisman says of the last two, “If you’re somebody who has no idea of where you want to start, these are two great places to start.”

What if women’s career opportunities are your passion?

Education Fund – Support women 35 years and older to return to education after adversity with the charitable arm of the Women’s Forum of New York.

No matter your giving interests, with both intention and attention, your giving dollars can go further.

/by

Finding Your Own Answers to Navigate 2017

,

the-art-of-asking-questionsBy Nicki Gilmour, Executive Coach and Organizational Pyschologist

I publish theglasshammer to help you excel at work. In 2017 theglasshammer will turn ten. We provide career advice and you can see how other women have climbed to the top, you can catch up on the research and academic studies in a digestible way to know the trends of what is happening for professional women at work, for diversity and inclusion patterns and to consider leadership strategies. However, career advice is just that; advice on how you can do things. Useful for some and not a fit for others and it is important to know what works for you -both personally and in context of where you are working and living.

Coaching on the other hand is about you finding answers to your own questions. We became coaches here, legitimately studied and got qualified as we saw that you can lean in, we saw that systemic work takes time and we now know that there is no method more effective than changing one person to change the world.

One more inclusive male leader changes lives, just as one more woman advancing is a piece of puzzle and if we can help you then you can help others. Criteria mass theory – does it work? We do not know as we are not there yet. I guess what we saw in this election is that by virtue of being a woman, that does not by default make you not sexist. I have discussed this at length in other posts and tune in on Friday December 16, 2016 for a fuller exploration.

Sometimes we just do not know what is going on until we have a coach to help us explore it safely. It is useful to understand the context, to explore the content of the challenge and to then find out a way to safely explore options before taking an action that will help in solving an issue or perhaps it will provide a step in achieving a longer term plan. Your plan, your agenda.

That is why, a coach can play such a unique role in your career trajectory. A mentor gives advice, a sponsor advocates for you but a coach can help you look at what you really want and help you get it.

I have three questions for you to ponder as we wrap up the year:

What do you want in 2017? How can you get it? What does success look like for you in 2017?

These are some questions to think about. Are they your questions? What are your questions? Marilee Adams wrote a clever book which I recommend you ask Santa or your gift bearer of choice to give you this holiday season called “Change your questions, change your life“. Often we just are not asking ourselves the right questions and are busy judging ourselves and others. In your life, in your career and managing your team, are you telling yourself and others the way it is more than questioning what you and others need and want?

We do not know what new macro-level obstacles will appear due to the changes in government in the US and with Brexit in the UK, but we do know that we can examine how we feel, think about what we want, assess risk and talk actions accordingly- at work and in life. You might find it gives you peace of mind in these volatile times.

Theglasshammer is offering a post-election special on coaching- 2 sessions for $399 to be used before Jan 20th.

Nicki Gilmour is a qualified individual/organizational psychologist and founder of glasshammer2.wpengine.com

/by

To Pioneer or Not to Pioneer? Being the First Female President of the USA

,

hillary-clinton-featuredBy Nicki Gilmour, Executive Coach and Organizational Pyschologist

It has been quite difficult to avoid the US election season this year, even if you do not live in the United States. I have avoided writing about it for many reasons including general fatigue with the whole topic and not wanting to further burden people who want to see some other topic discussed in the media. But, today is election day so how can we avoid it? Today is the day to talk about how it matters and how it should not matter that the potential next President of the USA is female.

Like her or loathe her, Hillary Clinton is doing it. She is determined, smart and driven. You should admire her ambition and her sheer stamina in trying to fulfil it. Equally, we should all understand our immediate blind spot that we have as we would never think about a man’s ambition level. We expect them to be ambitious whether they are or not, just as we expect them to be leader-like in their natural born traits whether they are or not. I have written about this many times and Virginia Schein has pioneered this research for 40 years in her “Think Manager, Think Male” work since the early 1970s.

Many countries including countries that do not have clean drinking water have had female premiers, so again no matter what your politics are or personal sentiments are towards Hillary; she is pioneering and going where no woman has gone before in the USA.

Why does it matter that she is a woman? And why does it matter that you are a woman at work?

Sexism is real. I want to thank Trump for helping us see the real and ugly effects of talk and actions that for too long have been described as innocuous. If he wins today, then we know the road ahead for what it is. The issue is on the table at last, a discussion that can be addressed, as it is most dangerous when subverted and it had lurked under the table pretending that we had already sorted it out when we clearly had not.

If Hillary wins today, then we know that she as one person has a lot of work as President and we should be careful that we do not project all our fears and hopes onto her. One woman in charge does not gender parity make and it will be fascinating to see what happens as research has shown that often a woman in charge is not necessarily great for the talent pipeline.

Asking her to run the free world and change gender inequity without help is a disaster waiting to happen. So, many will relish her being judged about the topic just as so many are questioning why Obama did not fix racism. Sometimes it is easier to not be the identity in question. Asking him to fix racism and asking Hillary to fix sexism is in fact racist and sexist and impossible without everyone doing behavior change yet this is pretty much what we ask diversity managers to do every single day at work.

We have written about assimilation and we have talked about the Queen Bee syndrome. Clinton has been given narrow behavioral parameters during the campaign battles from which she can operate, as all women are. The most encouraging element of this game show competition to be President, is that we can see that women are not going to put up with the sexist nonsense anymore and those who do are exposed for the role they play in what was previously covert collusion with the patriarchical status quo. Equally good men, truly good guys are also going to bat for women in their actions. Discussions can be had and progress can be made, as soon as we get out of the messy middle!

Save

Save

/by

Women and STEM: Why We Need to Reclaim Our Belonging

,

women in technologyBy Aimee Hansen

We are increasingly conveying a new message to our daughters and nieces when it comes to girls’ and women’s place in STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics): You belong.

“Ada Twist, Scientist” by Andrea Beaty held the top spot on the NYT best sellers among children’s picture books for four weeks as of October 16th (still in the top 10), joining Beaty’s “Rosie Revere, Engineer,” on the list for 76 weeks now.

In August, “Ada’s Ideas: The Story of the Ada Lovelace, the World’s First Computer Programmer” by Fiona Robinson was released. More of the books we give to our children to read are saying, STEM “is for girls” – and not only that, but they are exploring themes like passion, perseverance, and the value of failure.

Ada matters, and so does recognizing all the forgotten or overshadowed women in STEM, because it’s not that women are just entering these fields now, thank you very much. It’s that girls and women are being desperately courted back into them.

A Broken STEM Narrative

In an episode entitled, “When Women Stopped Coding,” NPR noted that women were a pioneering, rising presence in computer science until a stark turning point in 1984: when computers came into homes and the cultural narrative began glorifying them as toys for the boys.

From that year, the rising cultural narrative pushed girls out at home while talented women dropped out of tech in schools. In 1984, women represented 37% of computer science majors and despite the rising demand, today it’s 18%.

This was not the first time capable women were written out of the STEM story, just a recent one. The tired narrative that women don’t belong in STEM replays through the industry stereotypes and cultural dynamics that keep women away, throw an extra hurdle in their path, or drive them out.

Every time a new study (2016) shows that “woman” is still perceived by both men (even more so) and women to be incompatible with “successful scientist” (or programmer, or engineer, or executive, or leader), it’s proof that a limited narrative is still being internalized by our culture.

This “STEM is for men” narrative is dangerous, because it’s also written women right out of a rising proportion of high-reward, high-in-demand jobs. Bad for women, yes. And crippling for the U.S. economy.

Talent Shortage and Competitive Lag

A new report from Accenture entitled “Cracking the Gender Code: Get 3x More Women In Computing” calls the current lack of women a “national crisis with severe implications for America’s place in the global economy and for the future of women.”

Consider that women take home half of computing degrees in Malaysia and nearly half of engineering degrees in Indonesia. In the USA, women receive just 18% of computer science undergraduate degrees and 19% of engineering degrees.

The Accenture report states that job growth within the computer industry is growing at three times the national average, creating unmet demand. In 2015, there were over half a million open computing jobs in the U.S., but only 40,000 computer science graduates.

By 2018, it’s estimated that 2.4 million STEM jobs will be unfilled. The report points out that the shortfall of analysts in the U.S. is greater than the surplus of analysts in India and China combined. Increasingly these jobs are newly emerging jobs that haven’t existed before, requiring new specialized skills.

The glaring reality is that STEM needs women if the U.S. economy hopes to retain any leadership in digital innovation.

Women Sidelined Within Economy

An AAUW report states that engineering and computing represent 80% of the jobs in STEM, offering the highest return on investment and best job prospects.
Studies have shown that STEM jobs pay women better relatively to other jobs.

But women are least represented in engineering (13% of jobs) and computer science (26%), and the Accenture analysis showed that the gender pay gap within U.S. computing roles widened by 48% between 2011 and 2015, as women are missing out on the high-value roles.

Bringing women back into computer science isn’t just about progress in STEM. It’s about “bringing women back to the center of our economy.”

Encouraging Girls and Young Women In Tech

The Accenture report recommends a three-stage strategy to “more than triple the number of women working in computing in the U.S. to 3.9 million by 2025”, or 39% of the workforce. This would generate nearly $300 billion in additional cumulative earnings for women.

“The keys to improvement include: sparking the interest of girls in junior high school, sustaining their commitment in high school where early gains are often lost,” states the report, “and inspiring college undergraduates by reframing computer curriculums.”

Equal exposure is not enough, but actually re-tailoring educational programs towards girls, young women, and women – at all levels. Interventions at the college level would only result in 1.9 million in computing in 2025 (1.2 million now).

The first-ever technology and engineering literacy test in 2014 found that eighth grade girls (45%) were more proficient at engineering and technology related tasks than boys (42%).

A few years later, those same young women are less likely to take the related AP exams (only 20% of computer science exam takers) and less likely in their first college year to intend to major in these fields.

Accenture states that 69% of the potential growth in the computer pipeline is down to attracting girls at junior high age, as 74% of women in computing now were exposed in junior high.

This demands exposing girls to coding in more attractive ways (eg gaming), changing stereotypes, and increasing awareness of all parties (teachers, parents) about how computing can help change the world for the better.

Multiple initiatives here and globally are dedicated to recruiting girls and women into STEM- such as Million Women Mentors, the WISE campaign which seeks to bring one million women into STEM in the UK, and Girls Who Code.

At the high school level is when interest in computer science drops. The report recommends redesigning high school courses, creating grassroots campaigns around the difference STEM can make, and attracting more women teachers.

Supporting Women In Tech

At the college level, we’ve witnessed that strong, focused efforts can result in dramatic changes.

In 2016, Dartmouth graduated more female (54%) than male engineers, a first for a national research university. The program features more collaboration, a supportive network with diverse role models, and a “hands-on, project-based” approach, which exposes students to engineering who may not have chosen it.

In 2016, Harvey Mudd graduated a majority of women in computer science (54%) and physics (52%) for the first time ever, having already graduated a majority in engineering two years ago. Importantly, 64% of the 2016 computer science graduates who had accepted a full-time job had a position in the tech industry, compared to 30% in 2011. Only ten years ago, women were only 10% of computer science majors.

Under President Maria Klawe since 2006, Harvey Mudd has famously made three key changes that removed obstacles for women, such as reworking introductory courses to attract women and integrating research opportunities, and it only took a few years to quadruple CS majors and less than a decade to arrive to the landmark classes of 2014 and 2016.

At Harvey Mudd in 2017, six of the school’s seven department chairs and 38% of its professors will be women.

Biasing Recruitment towards Women

It’s not surprising that a slew of diversity apps designed to help to mitigate bias in hiring and promotion have been rising out of Silicon Valley, in many cases led by women who have faced bias in action in the tech industry.

These ideas help reduce the biases that keep women and minorities out of tech roles. But after such acute exclusion with such growing demand, it will take more than eliminating bias against women to address the massive talent gaps. It will take educational strategies that lean in towards girls and women.

Representation, visibility, and mentorship of women in these fields remains paramount. It starts to rewrite the broken cultural narrative and reminds both girls and women that we do belong – from our children’s books to our leadership.

Being visible is arguably the most influential thing an engineer, scientist, programmer, mathematician, and executive in any of these fields can do to encourage change.

Because it’s not just that girls and women belong. It’s that they are needed.

/by