Year In Review 2021: The Great Reckoning

, ,

Year in Review 2021The great resignation has taken the main stage for big news for professionals and career path navigation in 2021. With the pandemic still raging, there has been a widespread re-evaluation with “what really matters?” being the theme for professional women and men alike. The great reckoning of “does this work, and work for me?” has emerged from a combination of elements that have brought people to a point where they want to look more deeply at their values and how those values align with their workplace and firm culture, beyond the paycheck alone.

Realities such as exhaustion or burnout effect are much higher in 2021 than 2020 due to the ongoing slog of Covid and the effects it has on all aspects of life and work. McKinsey/Lean In’s most recent report on Women in the Workplace 2021 states 42% of women feel burned out regularly in 2021 as opposed to a reported 32% in 2020 and more than men in both years.

Conversely, in the same report, progress is shown at between 6-24% for the pipeline of future female senior managers and leaders, with the most progress being at SVP and C-suite levels but still not surpassing a third of all leaders in these positions. However, as someone who has covered this topic deeply for the best part of fifteen years, I want to underline that 6% may not seem big, but it can be considered as progress finally after many stalled years. This is at least a trend in the right direction of progress and you can see the numbers and insights and analysis on them from theglasshammer.com from 2011 here in all Year in Reviews.

Active Listening- Feeling Heard is Important

Is the world changing for the better? As it pertains to not tolerating overt sexism and racism, yes clearly it is, as everyone is quicker to pour light on things that just don’t fly anymore.

In fact, men are starting to behaviorally show up as allies when they should and interestingly a new Catalyst study suggests this can be dependent on whether they feel they will be heard as humans, on many topics as well as this specific one. Manager openness to hearing inputs and suggestions, from how the job should be done to elements regarding culture such as inclusion, increases the chance of men speaking up against sexism from 35% to 62%.

Feeling heard is a human trait, no one likes to think they are talking to a brick wall or invisible, yet 80% of my leadership development assignment as an executive coach to senior Wall Street women and men involves delivering the bad news that peers and direct reports feel that managers don’t listen to them. Kate Murphy’s book You’re Not Listening: What You’re Missing and Why It Matters is a compelling journalistic exploration of what happens when people listen to each other, which can apply to any relationship, spouse, friend or child as well as to being a better executive or manager. Surely, now is the time for managers to listen?

Opportunity in Disruption

‘The Great Resignation’ doesn’t have to threaten diversity efforts, but rather isn’t it time to do things better and in some cases, differently?

Some people might want to go back to the office some or even all of the time, while others might want to stay working from home some, most or all of the time- and with most landing on the same preference of being given the choice to make their own decisions. What leaders seem to be missing is that it is about empowering people with choices to control their time, not mandating face time in the building.

In fact, this topic is very much about leadership development and mindset shift. Susan Ashford, Professor in the Management and Organizations group at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business, explores the concept of flexing as a growth mindset for leaders. She discusses empowering people to know their needs and to be radical in their own “self management” in her new book about leadership learning called The Power of Flexing. This concept of letting employees get on with it on their terms in this Covid era world is backed up by research by Peter Capelli, Director of the Center for Human Resources at Wharton University, who suggests that in fact, many people are finding that they are thriving in a remote or a hybrid version of work. This study reveals that people are motivated when they are achieving their goals along with two very important things: feeling valued, which is the biggest driver, and being within a supported and inclusive environment. Capelli’s research also shows that getting tasks done to create a sense of purpose alone comes in last as a motivation driver, so endless piles of work in the wrong isolating conditions can lead to disengagement and quitting.

Adam Grant, Professor of Psychology at Wharton, researched back in 2007 how employee performance is increased when there is a feeling of helping an actual human by meeting with them to know about their issue and having the ability to try and help. Putting a face to a name seems to matter, and as face to face human contact has been reduced in the past eighteen months, it will be interesting when we see future research into videoconferencing (as a close second or even as a replacement?). It does seem like some major Fortune 500 companies are taking the leap of faith that remote work is the future with PwC announcing that it will allow all 40,000 of its US client services employees to work virtually and remotely, with the UK office following suit with an additional 22,000 people allowed to work remotely.

Aligning People and Technology

Getting leaders to understand the importance of aligning the human side with the operational and technological side is key to engage and retain talent – it’s futurism and that requires a lot of mental complexity as systems thinking will need to be applied. Are leaders up for the challenge?

To create the workplace of the future, it is key to start with the workforce of the future. Meryl Rosenthal, CEO of Flexpaths, has been pioneering remote and flex work for all since 2005. She sees the trend as here to stay and knows the role of leaders is crucial to success.

She comments, 
“As hybrid work increasingly becomes a reality across organizations, ensuring that alignment at the top doesn’t wane is key. At FlexPaths we are seeing more and more companies ill-prepared for the downstream impacts of poorly implemented hybrid work. With plummeting engagement, uncertain executives and ineffective communication, now is the time to focus on leaders on why it is important to get a plan as the future is now”.

People Want Acts not Ads

Finally, evolved employers must realize that employees want to see real acts, not just lip service and advertising around issues that are value-driven. Whether it is working remotely or responding to social or environmental issues, it is crucial that corporations understand that walking the talk and closing the identity gap between espoused and lived values happens. Data of both quantitative and qualitative nature is required to understand what people expect from their employer. If your company was a person, would you want to hang out with them?

We believe diversity and gender issues can be solved when companies finally understand that organizational development is important and that diversity is not about a Noah’s Ark approach but rather about lived experience. Behaviors matter as they all add up to create culture.

We wish everyone a happy, safe, peaceful and joyful festive season. See you in 2022.

By Nicki Gilmour, Founder and CEO of theglasshammer.com

Nicki founded theglasshammer in 2007 to inspire, inform and empower professional women in their careers. We have been the leading and longest running career advice online and in person media company in the USA for professional women in financial services.

We also provide executive coaching services and organizational coaching under our sister brand evolvedpeople.com

Thank you to all readers, sponsors, supporters and contributors over the past 15 years. We couldn’t do it without you!

For the women by the women.

If you want to coached by Nicki in 2022, write to her nicki@theglasshammer – to find out more about the process. She works with VP level and above.

/by

Year End Review 2019: Diversity and Inclusion in 2020 Must Be Done Differently

2019 year end reviewThe headline for rounding up this decade is simple: doing the same thing over and over again is the very definition of madness.

Neuroscience and behavioral science have the answers to the (lack) of gender equity issue. The questions are, do people want the answer? And are they prepared to what it takes to get there? The term “the glass ceiling” was coined 41 years ago by Marilyn Loden who argued that the “the ‘invisible glass ceiling’ – the barriers to advancement that were cultural not personal – was doing the bulk of the damage to women’s career aspirations and opportunities.”

To that point, 41 years later, companies are still doing one thing wrong when addressing the issue of gender. What is this core truth? It is written concisely in the London School of Economics editorial in Forbes and is as simple as this: we focus too much on the role of the individual in perpetuating or solving these issues. Resulting in blaming men and burdening women.

Why is progress so slow? The decade in review

First of all, progress is slow. The decade started with a flurry of great research from Catalyst and Sylvia Ann Hewlett offering strong answers like sponsorship over mentorship and increased pipeline attention for women in crucial moments. This was good work, helpful and even hopeful but lacked the much needed shift of work from individuals to systemic answers despite knocking on that door. Progress was derailed in my opinion by 2013 by the unwitting false prophecy of “Lean In” with a misleading mantra which distracted leaders and diversity people from the real work as this false single fix was what people wanted to hear. More work for the women, everything else untouched. This is a prevalent theme with employee networks and training courses this entire decade. The most recent episode in the news was the EY training asking women to act nicely around men course leak which someone finally recognized as worth a whistleblow.

Even “Lean In” has the conclusion in 2019 that the sane academics and theglasshammer have been suggesting all the while, which is that you do what you have to do to get the system to lean in as well in order to truly succeed. The book was useful as it sparked the beginning of the discussion around privilege, and Ann Marie Slaughter’s counter piece on the system was a way to introduce what systemic barriers meant for people entering the discussion. Sandberg’s later work with Adam Grant on was excellent as we know she personally did the work but the people who made her the poster child only heard the message of “its on the women to do more”. The brightest spots for me in this era of 2013-2018 were Herminia Ibarra’s Act Like a Leader, Think Like a Leader with act-first-internalize-later theory but in conjunction with the inside-out approach of challenge – whose beliefs you are running around with? – of Kegan and Lahey’s work Immunity to Change. Finally, there is Cordelia Fine’s book called Testosterone Rex stating that behavioral differences are cultural, not biologically natural, to debunk the faux brain science of the two thousand and mid-teens. I won’t name names, but even if you believe men are from Mars and women are from Venus (which I don’t), we are all conditioned by earthly norms developed from  cultural (societal and inside whichever family you lived) messaging.

Legal Structures Do Matter Also

The World Economic Forum at Davos in 2018 proclaimed in their “Global Gender Gap Report” that at this rate it will take between 106 and 400 years to achieve gender equity. The US is ranked 51 in the global index, which includes economic participation, heath and survival, education and political (legal) empowerment. Iceland is ranked number one, with the Nordics filling the top four spots of getting there and UK sitting at number 15 in this global study. Guess what? Strong social fabric with less machismo, a safety net and laws that protect women seem to matter for gender equity. What we can learn from this report is that legal and policy support is fundamental to a gender equal society. The Equal Rights Amendment was still not ratified in the USA this decade, so women are technically not legally equal to men. Worth watching the documentary Equal means equal.

Does systemic change influence attitudinal change?

Yes, but only to the extent to which people can dissect their feelings around their thoughts. If someone has a strong belief system (say the implicit patriarchy and its schema of how society is constructed and run with normed and formed gender roles in this case of “diversity”) then it is harder for them to have attitudinal switches. However, if people have no feelings or the switch supports their feelings (and arousal such as fear is a common feeling) they are very easy to change their minds. Change in the status quo terrifies most people.

Also, we tend to have fixed ideas on the way it is and the “who is it.” This shows up as stereotypes, positive and negative, as we often forget how we naturally authorize men and deauthorize women all day long – and both sexes do it. We have written about how people hold stereotypes ubiquitously as many women have so much internalized sexism that they enjoy a massive benefit-of-the-doubt exercise on talent and competence as much as the next guy. Just this week Michelle Obama talked about not being so quick to defer and to resist a man’s presumption of power. Interestingly, if you read social media or onlne newsletter’s comment boxes, after a statement like this, someone (it is inevitable) says not all men, defensively of men, or worse, something personally dismissive (subconsciously racist) about Michelle Obama as a person. Observe your feelings and reactions as it is exactly this type of cognitive awareness that enables us to make choices such as language and nomination of the most talented person and get away from the binary of good or bad categorization that prevents you from uncovering biases and preferences. I mean literally Boris Johnson, said and did everything Theresa May had already done, but society and history will never remember that. This happens to women in meetings all day long.

It is not a battle of the sexes as that is a race to the bottom and we lose so much by generalizing all women or all men. Working on where cognitive process meets social conditioning is what the future of diversity needs, not HR compliance work on drinks parties or even panels (we have stopped holding them and ours were pretty groundbreaking). It is not Noah’s Ark with two of everyone and even if it was that, we have failed there too to gain real parity and have created all the wrong conversations.

It is costing everyone money by not changing. Possibly you personally. Practice forgiveness starting with yourself because we are all on a journey to evolve ourselves, our teams and society at large.

Awareness first, then doing the work to understand the very unique ways that each person needs to make the behavioral changes that creates success, sustainability and happiness is what we help leading women ( and men) in financial services and Fortune 1000 companies do with our coaching work. If you want to book a complimentary chemistry call with me to discuss if coaching could help you in 2020, book here.

We wish the readers of theglasshammer a happy and safe festive season. See you in January.

/by

2018 Year in Review: Looking ahead to 2019 and Beyond

,

By Nicki Gilmour, CEO and Founder of theglasshammer.com

As 2019 is getting underway, I dare to feel slightly upbeat since figures show that there have been gains for women in board seats for the first time in ten years in the US with women making up 31% of newly appointed directors for 3000 companies between January and May of last year. Do not question me too deeply on my optimism as overall, there is still vast amounts of work to be done since there is a tenacious link at best between board and female management progress. And, before we get too excited, the number women on boards is only hoovering around 18%-20% overall regarding female board directors in big companies in the US. The European Union varies greatly country by country with some highlights and low lights which is interesting since culture is the variable element in a legislatively mandated arena. France is leading the charge with almost 35% women on boards with Nordic/Baltic nations (Sweden then Latvia next at around 30%) with Italy, UK, Germany and the Netherlands inching up around 26% female board representation. Asia is deemed to have the lowest female board numbers (around 8%) but higher numbers (40%) for senior female leadership roles than the US or most of Europe.

Why Such Slow Progress for Boards?

As research from Kellogg Insights (Northwestern) points out, the criteria for hiring women for boards puts an unfair standard on women that seems to not apply to men regarding their job title or experience. Also, there is the little elephant in the room regarding why perceptual euphoria is reached when a third of board are women, as opposed to not putting unconscious putting limits on it as what we are really saying is we expect one gender to continue to  dominate decision making. Power sharing is never really that if women are expected to not exceed 30% of board representation, (if that is even reached) whereas men are being implicitly expected to hold 70-100% of it for the near and far future despite the ten year (at least) claim that women are graduating in greater numbers from university.

Back to the Future?

Should we re-read “Men and women of the corporation?” This amazing book written almost forty two years ago seems to be still relevant today Rosabeth Moss Kanter states in an interview to (another favorite) Robin Ely in HBR, via Forbes,

“The main idea in Men and Women of the Corporation is about institutions and self-perpetuating cycles. It’s about the interplay of structure and behavior. If you observe behavior—like a woman seems to be less ambitious in a particular situation—do you conclude “Women don’t go for success,” or do you conclude there’s something about that situation that’s evoking a certain kind of behavior. I looked inside the company, and I looked at the evidence about gender roles outside the company, in society. There was always an interplay. There were women in management, but they tended to be concentrated in the more routinized functions. And if you’re in the more routinized functions, it’s hard to break out, because you’re not being rewarded for independent judgment, and we still have that today, with the notion that women lack “vision” compared to men……. What would account for ambition or a lack of ambition? Opportunity. That’s pretty simple. If the door is open, you can aspire to go through it. If it doesn’t seem to be open, you can’t. In the company I wrote about in Men and Women, a lot of it had to do with the placement mechanisms.”

This book was published in 1977. It is 2019 and frankly we have seen such a fast rate of change in every other aspect of life, but not diversity.

Most corporations despite their diversity programs and networks and sponsoring of gala tables, do not have the faintest notion of what they need to do to see real change. Even Robin Ely’s paper on Diversity and Difference is twenty three years old and her “new” and third paradigm ( and a good one) seems like new news since most firms are bumbling around thinking they need certain groups to sell to same demographics or worse in denial of differences without understanding the real work needed to be done.

Wider Society- Gains and Losses.

Over the years, I have written pieces on how culture affects what happens inside and outside of the office here on this site, even just last year in the review of the 2017 year, and it is the core backbone of how to advance women at work and better this and other societies. We all to a lesser or greater degree have bias  as whether we want to admit it or not, its cognitive process and we can blame our brains. It is what we are going to do about over-ridding our brain that interests me as that will divide the evolved and the unevolved on this topic.

These past two years we have seen the use of backlash as a fascinating mechanism ( not the only one, but one that should be named). The first reflex by some was the whitelash of having the first Black President (I use the word Black over African American because the reflex was based on that definition). The second reflex was the testing assumptions exercise regarding ambivalent sexism when it comes to patriarchy and power of the Presidential US election with Trump v. Hillary. The third reflex of creating the most diverse US government to confront the highest office’s sympathies and policies. The end result means a more diverse government, but it is still worth nothing Congress is still 80% male, 80% white and 92% Christian so there are parallels with the corporate construct of a few is enough, if not too many, while dominant legacy groups never get the same restrictive belief measurement. Double standards still are very much at play and the African writer Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie who wrote “We Should all be Feminists” eloquently talks of this.

Those firms who do understand the whole picture of diversity as a change projects as opposed to Noah’s Ark are seeing the rewards of it, despite a continued backdrop of assumed power and authority by one gender and an overarching air. Yes, we have seen assumed authority and credibility challenged and lessened with #metoo, LGBT and other advocacy efforts creating bottom up change of outdated or inequitable decisions from flawed systems. But, there is still a strong tolerance of unchecked behaviors for one group over all others and it is dependent on which body and skin you were born into and very little else.

Conclusion

The system needs to always be addressed for transformational change to happen. Leaders and people have behaviors that create impactful actions and whatever the intention is, the impact is what matters. Structures and promotional mechanisms are a very important thing to do, start there because let’s face it, people didn’t stop smoking on airplanes because it was the “right thing to do”. Mindsets and incentivizing structures are more closely related than we think!

Read all Year In Reviews here (10 years worth to compare and measure organic change or the lack of it for yourself).

About Nicki Gilmour

Nicki founded theglasshammer.com in 2007 and has published more than 8000 articles on advancing women at work. She has undertaken deep study at Teachers College, Columbia University to understand the systemic cause and effect of power and authority as it pertains to diversity, performance and change in workplace and wider culture. Nicki has a masters in individual/organizational psychology with a specialization in change leadership and an executive coaching certification (masters level) specializing in the neuroscience of coaching regarding subconscious mind and the behavioral implications regarding goal setting and execution. Nicki has clients in Fortune 500 and financial services all over the world and can be reached nicki@theglasshammer.com

/by

Year End Review 2017: Professional Women and the Culture War

,

Nicki Gilmour - Founder of The Glasshammer.comBy Nicki Gilmour, CEO and Publisher of theglasshammer.com

Every year in December I write about the runners and the riders, the losses and the gains for women in corporations. The usual statistical update of no movement in female leaders in aggregate can be seen by checking out the report compiled by McKinsey and Lean in called Women in the Workplace 2017.  More calls for increased hiring of female talent in the beginning of their careers to create parity at the top. Culture change, not just binders full of women is the key, as we know spreadsheets alone cannot fix this issue. Yes, there is much work to be done structurally with hiring bias, pay inequality for apples to apples jobs and flawed promotional processes, but we are missing the point; people leave jobs when their sense of purpose is brought into question. Sometimes it is related to money and recognition for the job done. Sometimes it is about competing agendas for men and women to fit life in and having babies is often cited as the issue that prevents women from succeeding. Yet, rarely are the power structures around who gets to keep their professional lives somewhat intact, supported and without question ever talked about.

Neuroscience and the psychology of advancing men

Our cognitive processes and confirmation biases make us assume that it is a given that men should advance at work and in life. Regardless of what men actually want or are actually capable of and the perception of white men knowing more persists through good times and bad times. Sallie Krawcheck wrote an excellent piece last week in the NY Times, in which she encapsulates the whole issue of how we devalue women. She was a leader at the world’s biggest finance shop but still had the guy in front of her, mansplain her business model to her. She commented in the article,

“I was astonished, because I have managed more financial advisers in my career than probably anyone in the country. I realized in that moment how deep our gender views run, how men are still seen as leaders and women as more junior.”

We are a long way off equality and the power of perception has a role to play, as many men and some women believe that things are close to equal, even in firms where the number of female senior executives is 1 in 10. Perception works both ways, it keeps us in and it makes us leave if we see no pathway forward.

Our brain creates inference and assigns values that we don’t even know about that then writes narratives making us think we know the outcome based on past experience and current norms. This surfaces as conscious and unconscious beliefs about the world and how it should work.

Why do women and specifically white straight women have a complicated history of complicity and collusion around men who are deeply flawed or incompetent? Internalized misogyny and white privilege and betting on what has always been is the underpinning element. Even if you think you are a progressive person, liberal and modern, I hear cultural programming mixed with personal experience that 99.9% of the time makes you accept biased structures as the benchmark. The “think manager, think male” research shows that most women consistently rank men as a group higher than women for preferential traits such as competency and productivity. We all have deep programming and cognitive dissonance. Even if we are not stereotyping in our language and individual actions, most people overlook the systemic influences that create our overall environment. That silent invisible operating system called the patriarchy dictates the entire scope of possibilities and weighted value of your actions. What gets preference? Much like your phone, you cannot see the mechanics of how things are ordered and valued for memory and battery unless you look very closely, but instead can only choose the app that can personally help you in the moment. Until we address the fact that the system has weighted preferences on outcomes, we will see surface choices only.

Sure, there has been a deep perturbation in the fabric of the status quo this year from the Women’s March in January to this month’s cover of Time magazine announcing the silence breakers as the person (now people) of the year. There are so many conversations going on now that just didn’t happen outside academia even a year ago. Themes are being explored editorially and widely that were only for the most studied this time last year. Topics like collusion, such as the unpacking of the Harvey Weinstein power play are written about daily now. But, the battle and the war is far from won and this moment in time is one we can spiral up or down from. The relief of surfacing of 2017’s #metoo is only the relief that we can speak about such things openly. Exposing that the system is weighed against certain people based on their social identity (gender, ethnicity etc) and the power given to a person depending on their biological sex and place therefore in society is not the same as addressing systemic inequities. Certainly, the Supreme court itself has distance to go since American women are not equal under law (Equal Rights Amendment is not ratified) and LGBT people are categorized first and foremost behaviorally and not legally recognized intrinsically as people.

What do we need to do?

Care enough to form full and informed thoughts and be heard on the topic. Good men are doing good things and walking the talk such as Unilever’s CEO Paul Polman who voiced his shock at the World Economic Forum’s report when it was revealed that it will take over 200 years to get parity. Men have to understand that this is not a women’s issue. While people are talking up and talking down feminism, maybe we should be speaking about redefining masculinity. This TED talk by Justin Baldoni called “Why I am done being Man enough” is inspiring for all to watch.

Cordelia Fine has written an award winning book called “Testosterone Rex: Unmaking the Myths of our Gendered Minds” that is my holiday recommended reading to you as it debunks the myths of Men are from Mars and other purported differences that stop us from solving the issues. We have to stop believing the faux science that divides us or falsely categorizes us as it actually contributes to a system of yore.  Unless we talk about what masculinity is, the good , the bad and the ugly of it shaped from the ancient Greeks to now, we cannot get to a better version. We cannot get to understand what it means to be a woman in society if we do not examine what it also means to be a man. What are boys and men messaged? What does peer pressure do and Tony Porter talks about the problem of the “man card” in his excellent TED talk. He states, ‘My liberation of a man is tied to your liberation as a woman’. Culture not just biology, is what we need to look at and understand that keeping to a binary instead of understanding spectrums of human nature is not helpful.  There are men and women ready to engage in this conversation and I am ready to have a more advanced conversation in 2018 with everyone and we are well placed to begin!

Seasons Greetings from us here at theglasshammer.com and check out our coaching website: evolvedpeople.com as the change starts with you!

/by

Happy New Year!

,

Nicki Gilmour2017 marks the 10th year anniversary for glasshammer2.wpengine.com as we begin to crank up our virtual presses again to inform, inspire and empower you as professional women navigating your careers. We aim to help you by providing you with information, expert opinions and advice which you can use in the best way you see fit. We specifically help you in your individual circumstances by coaching you and connecting you to each other via our events.

This week we offer 5 of the best articles that I have enjoyed as publisher in 2016. In case you miss great articles, we will highlight our picks every 6-8 weeks to recap them this year based on what we feel is most useful.

https://theglasshammer.com/2016/03/09/beating-bias-technology-changing-recruiting-game/

https://theglasshammer.com/2016/02/25/why-you-should-avoid-overwork-to-be-effective-in-your-job/

https://theglasshammer.com/2016/06/02/resilience-storms-critical-leadership-development/

https://theglasshammer.com/2016/03/02/stereotypes-at-work-do-women-buy-into-them-just-as-much-as-the-next-guy/

https://theglasshammer.com/2016/09/14/pack-your-bags-why-you-might-want-to-get-ahead-by-going-abroad/

Enjoy our content as all of this is made possible by our site sponsors and supporters.

A big thanks to current and founding sponsors Goldman Sachs, PWC and Shearman and Sterling
To loyal sponsors for many years Voya and Accenture and to WEX for joining us.
Thanks to Citi, Amex, Paamco, BNY Mellon and others who have sponsored events along the way on a consistent basis.

Thank you to our team here at theglasshammer – Louise our content manager, Cathie our profile writer and Aimee our journalist at large, Melissa who was our main editor/writer for 6 years, Jane, Erin, Pam, Jewells and finally Jill who all did so much to help us get here and to all the freelancers and contributors who have in the past and still continue to make this a great read!

Enjoy, and here is to a great 2017!

Sincerely,

Nicki Gilmour, Publisher and Founder of glasshammer2.wpengine.com

/by

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

2015 Year in Review: Professional Women, The Gender Discussion And Why Leaders Need To Be Involved

, ,

By Nicki Gilmour

Nicki Gilmour - Founder of The Glasshammer.comIt is December already so time for the annual Year in Review 2015 piece that looks at the progress, of the professional woman at work in the macro and micro sense. On a general level and where we can measure stats for boardrooms and management numbers, I have to report very little progress. However, on a company-specific level, some firms get it and are doing a great job at a comprehensive plan to tackle the issue of having a representation of women at all levels. Citi have just announced the addition of two more women to their Board for 2016- congrats to Ellen Costello and Renee James on those appointments.

I have outlined three crucial points in this article for any firm to take notice of when embarking on this journey. The other continuous notable effort that I think is worth mentioning is the increase in male gender champions and my favorite open letter of the year comes from John Ryan as he writes to Michael Moritz showing us that men also care about the endless stereotypes that make a mockery out of talented people of both sexes.

What do leaders who “get it” look like?

People, and specifically leaders of companies who get how to really create culture change around this very unresolved gender dilemma, all share a common ability. Smart leaders understand that they personally have to get involved as well as re-engineer processes to support behaviors beyond the evangelizing part. Leaders comprehend the strategic nature of what needs to happen, that companies are eco-systems and so every action has a reaction downstream and are prepared to address multiple areas at once. Since the culture of any team, company or even country is simply a culmination of ‘how we do things around here’, what and who gets tolerated, as well as what and who gets rewarded for their work means that any firm who can hold behavioral boundaries can improve their culture for all working there. It can be a win win and not a zero sum game.

Pierre Nanterme, CEO and Chairman of Accenture is the latest leader who is putting his money where his mouth is. He has aggressive hiring targets, revealing his goal as 40% of new hires being female by 2017 as well as initiatives to ensure pay parity at entry level and throughout a woman’s career to ensure women don’t get left behind. This disparity has been documented by Catalyst and others over the years to be almost $500,000 in the span of their career earnings.

Nanterme states,  “We believe strongly that gender equality is essential for a high-performing, talent-led organization. This commitment extends to pay, and we strive to ensure that all our people – women and men – are compensated fairly and equitably from the moment we hire them through the milestones of their careers here.”

Why do I believe Nanterme? Or least believe he has a shot at it? Well, other than the fact that he actually believes there are equally talented women as men to hire, unlike Mike Moritz of Sequoia Capital who just last week stated that there are no qualified women for him to hire (in Silicon Valley venture funding), Nanterme has addressed his blind spots whereas Mike has just showed his cognitive bias when he unwittingly revealed his closely held paradigm that hiring women would probably be a reflection of him lowering his standards.

That is the differentiator for me and as an organizational psychologist who is nine years into this topic with several live projects under my belt and the publisher of 4000 articles on theglasshammer.com, I find that the barriers to progress are definitely systemic but correctable, such as accurate succession planning processes and equal pay for the same job done. More interestingly, is that the maintainers of these barriers are actual people and it is entirely feasible to address issues just like any other area of operational efficiency and resource optimization but their refusal to acknowledge there is a problem beyond some sort of Noah’s Ark approach of ticking off lists is where the work gets weird.

We all have bias in the sense of preference but it is how preference is built in us that needs closer examination-let’s face it, when you have all the cards and have bias towards hiring one type of person and the rest of the system is aligned to support the stereotype, the stakes to change aren’t so high to address your own paradigms in life. Hence the word ‘diversity’ is a misnomer because what we are talking about in actuality is about who we choose and authorise to lead us, manage projects and generally get heard. It is all a meritocracy project and meritocracy exists in very few places if at all.

What three things can companies do better in 2016 to ensure progress?

Action #1 Leaders can lead on equality.

Status quo doesn’t change organically ever. There are levers and deliberate actions to take. How managers act will enhance or minimize the effects and impact of any program or policy that even the best HR team or women’s network could produce. So ensure they act well. Why leave that to chance?

By being a sponsor to ensure the right people get promoted or get allocated onto a project, men and the senior women that can “lift as they climb”, this can change the world one person at a time

Action #2 Stop expecting the women in your firm to fix the gender issue

Attracting, hiring or promoting women shouldn’t be a “woman’s” thing. Too many times, I see women’s networks trying to address these issues whilst everyone else gets on with their day jobs. Exclusively outsourcing this work to ERGs, networks and committees is really erroneous. Why would you put the onus on the group that is asking for their fair share of promotions and access to sit at the power table to be the people to fix the inequities in the system?

Not all companies leave all the work to the women and the women’s networks to deal with the issue. Simply put, it is everyone’s problem to fix inequities but some people can fix it faster than others due to their official influence on talent processes and workplace culture.

Action #3 Women and Men all need to address their biases

One of the most surprising elements that I have personally discovered over the years is that some women revere men as stereotypical leaders more than men do, or on a equal par, even if they themselves are arguably the smartest person in the room. Fascinating to say the least and it happens in small and big ways, from deferring to the male counterpart in meetings to unconsciously believing that men make better leaders. I have talked about this at length in other articles in other years.

My advice? Admit you are part of the problem (if you are) because everything you need to know about how ridiculous we all are, based on the binary of gender identity and how being a woman is still somehow a trait that effects a woman’s ability to lead, manage, do deals and generally do well at work can be seen most compellingly here.

While we are on the subject, can we dispel the myth that brain science has anything to do with performance at work (and men are from next door not Mars as it turns out).Social conditioning has a lot to answer for and you can do something about that as the impact is real with the latest research from Accenture showing that Gen Y women despite everything we have told them are still less likely to ask for a pay rise than their male counterparts and 47% of this particular survey respondents cannot see a path to the top.

Finally, can you get everyone on board? Of course not! But those who don’t will be in the minority both in numbers and effectual influence and power, so let’s get started! Smokers still want to smoke on airplanes, right? The difference is culturally a shift took place only because a law and a process facilitated that shift. Think about it.

We wish you a peaceful, prosperous and Happy New Year to all theglasshammer.com readers and supporters.

By Nicki Gilmour

/by

2014: A Year in Review

,

sparkling 2014 lightsWith the holidays upon us, it is beginning to look a lot like ……Groundhog Day. From a numbers perspective, this Year End Review has very little progress to report on a macro level. The number of women on boards is pretty stagnant – 17.7% in 2014, up from 16.6% in 2013 to be exact in the Fortune 1000. The FTSE board seats for women are up slightly to 23%. Outside of the big firms, the Gender Diversity Index is helping track progress in smaller firms and to understand the gains from specific industries which is helpful but doesn’t provide a real wow factor this year there either.

Read more

/by

The Glass Hammer: 2013, A Year in Review

,

Nicki HeadshotBy Nicki Gilmour, Founder and CEO of The Glass Hammer

The Glass Hammer wants to congratulate the women who have broken the glass ceiling by joining the C-suite or becoming Executive Officers at Fortune 500 (US), FTSE 100 (UK), and other globally-listed companies on stock exchanges this year. Special congratulations are in order for the highest profile CEO female joiners featured on the 2013 Fortune, including Marillyn Hewson of Lockheed Martin, Mary Barra, CEO of GM motors, and Lynn Good, CEO of Duke Energy.

The achievements of these women become even more impressive in light of recent findings reported in Catalyst’s end-of-year census. Both the 2013 Catalyst Census: Fortune 500 Women Board Directors and the 2013 Catalyst Census: Fortune 500 Women Executive Officers and Top Earners found that number of women on boards and the number of women executive officers have not increased by even a single percentage point in the past year. In 2012, women held only 16.6 percent of board seats. In 2013, it was 16.9 percent. Last year, women held 14.3 percent of executive officer positions. In 2013, women held 14.6 percent. There was also no gain year over year, as women held only 8.1 percent of Executive Officer top earner slots.

The UK is showing a better rate of gains for women on Boards, with the current figure sitting at 19 percent in the FTSE 100 . Also, 24 percent of all appointments since May have been women.

So, despite more women than ever before being in the workforce, the numbers just aren’t moving. This is not to say that women aren’t gaining ground in other areas, but they’re often in the most battered of companies and industries. This comes as no surprise. The Glass Hammer has written extensively about women taking on the mantle of leadership during a time of crisis, otherwise known as the “glass cliff”. Writer Melissa Anderson outlined the pitfalls of “think female, think crisis” astutely, writing, “The position is highly visible and comes with a lot of potential power – but the risk of failure is high; so high in fact, that the board or management committee decides it’s time to try something completely new and different to try and get it right: put a woman in charge.”

Here’s the question that begs answer: why are the numbers stagnant?

What is Stopping Us?
According to the article “More women leaders in D.C. than C suite”, experience is more crucial in business than it is in American politics. In the piece, Herminia Ibarra, professor of organizational behavior at France’s Insead business school, said that to become CEO of a big company, you typically have to have had several key jobs. The professor cited Ginni Rometty, chair and CEO of IBM, and Marissa Mayer, CEO at Yahoo, as examples of women who held senior management seats before the leap into the C-suite.

Read more

/by

Leadership and Authorization: Our Publisher’s 2012 Year End Review

,

By Nicki Gilmour, Founder and CEO of The Glass Hammer

Last week saw a flurry of activity around women’s progress at work. It was a fitting end to a year that has been coined the Year of the Woman, due to increased female political representation here in the US and perhaps due to a few high profile appointments in the business world, such as Marissa Mayer as CEO of Yahoo and Virginia Rometty as CEO of IBM.

But before we start celebrating that our work is done here at The Glass Hammer, I would like to suggest that excessive media coverage of one or two appointments of women to top spots does not gender parity make.

Good Conversations

Last week, the 2020 Women on Boards campaign produced a series of events across the US on 12/12/12. 2020 WOB ’s mission is raising awareness to help get more women on boards – 20 percent by 2020 to be precise. I attended one of these events hosted by the Forté Foundation and Ernst & Young in New York.

I was impressed by the event’s dialogue, which recognized that corporate practices needed to change if women are to be recruited onto boards. I was encouraged by the poignant discussion around systems and policies being reviewed – such as terms limits for board members and retirement ages, which average 75 years old.

Read more

/by