The "Duh" Statistic

It’s true that I said my next blog post would talk about numbers, but I’m going to digress for a minute, based upon a recent conversation I had with a gentleman regarding women in leadership. He cited a USA TODAY survey that asked female CEOs, chairs and company founders to identify the one mentor who had the most influence on their careers. Thirty-three of the thirty-four who responded identified a man. This gentleman seemed quite surprised, so I simply asked him, “Why do you think that is?” Although he told me knew why, he didn’t actually answer the question.

I told him that to me, this is what I call a “Duh” statistic. The answer to my question is that there have not, traditionally, been any women at the top to mentor those coming up. So, “Duh,” their mentor was going to be a man.

He seemed to be a bit surprised that the women surveyed would “admit” that their mentor was a man. I asked him why he thought they wouldn’t admit that – after all, it’s the truth. And again, it’s not as though they had a choice between a man and woman and chose a man over a woman. The important thing when looking at surveys and statistics is to look at the big picture, and to the possible reasons behind the numbers.

As more women work their way up into the executive level, there will be more women available to serve as mentors, and my guess is that if USA Today runs the survey again in twenty years, the numbers will be quite different.

Why Women Leaders?

I recently posted a question on LinkedIn (thanks to Ben Stone of RPO Consulting for his tutorial!), regarding how to promote my brand (helping women succeed personally and professionally) in an era where employers are suffering from “diversity fatigue.” One insightful comment commented that “[d]iversity fatigue comes from the perception that diversity initiatives are pursuing social, rather than business, objectives.”[1]

In one of my presentations, I point out that gender diversity at the top of an organization is about more than simply doing the “right thing,” which is the social issue aspect. There are also compelling business reasons. In a report by Development Dimensions International (“DDI”) the authors referenced a study conducted in 2008 that found that when there were “three or more women in senior management [the organization] scored higher on all dimensions directly linked to financial performance” than those organizations with no women at the top. [2] Additionally, the Global Executive Leadership Inventory (“GELI”), which measures degrees of competency in global leadership, was used to assess participants in Insead’s executive education program. It found that women were rated higher on nearly every category than men.[3]

The idea is not that only women should lead, any more than it’s a good idea to only have men at the top. It’s the balance that the organization should look for.

Unfortunately, what often happens is that organizations look at their c-suite, realize there are few, if any, women there, and begin “plugging women in” to various spots (usually HR). But if women have not had access to developmental opportunities such as mentoring, “choice” assignments and formal/informal education, they will struggle to succeed. It’s important, therefore, to identify high potential women early on, so that they can be developed appropriately. A formal succession plan can help this identification process be objective and gender neutral, which will, in turn, allow women access to developmental programs and a natural succession of women to the top positions.

In the next post, I'll give you some numbers regarding women in senior positions, and the implications for business. Then we'll talk about what organizations can do to change this, as well as what individual women can do.

[1] Daniel Kenna
[2] Howard, Ph.D., Ann, and Richard S. Well. Holding Women Back: Troubling Discoveries - and Best Practices for Helping Female Leaders Succeed. Rep. DDI's Global Leadership Forecast 2008/2009, 2008/2009. Print, citing Desvaux, G., Devillard-Hoellinger, S., & Meaney, C. (2008). A Business Case for women. The McKinsey Quarterly, (4), 26-33
[3]Ibarra, Herminia, and Obodaru Otilia. "Women and the Vision Thing." Harvard Business Review (2009): 62-70. Print.

Does Age Matter?

Coffee shops are a great place for entrepreneurs to work. Besides the obvious perks (free internet and good coffee), it’s a fabulous place to eavesdrop and hear what people are thinking and talking about.

Today there is a group of about six older women (probably in their late 60’s/early 70’s) sitting near me who are hopping mad. They are having one of the most vigorous political discussions I have heard in quite some time. They are knowledgeable, articulate and passionate about their country and the issues we all face.

Their discussion is of particular interest to me because of recent experiences I have had working with a variety of people on both diversity training and job searches. On the one hand, a panel of human resources people assured the job hunters that their organization did not discriminate against older people. Yet in my diversity training sessions with a different group of people, all acknowledged that age discrimination (among other types of discrimination) is, unfortunately, alive and well. This isn’t to say it is always intentional. Many of our impressions, both positive and negative, are made in the first 30 seconds after meeting someone (when the only thing we have to base that opinion on is appearance/presentation). We combine those impressions with our beliefs about people who look like the person in front of us (which are usually stereotypes), and come to a conclusion, whether accurate or not. This often hurts older people searching for work.

We all know the stereotypes associated with older people; they don’t have as much energy, they’re just putting in their time until retirement, they’re not up-to-date on current issues, and they’re set in their ways. But I can’t help but think that if hiring managers could hear these women, those stereotypes would be blown out of the water in a heartbeat.

Are Women Visionary?

Knowing my interest in women’s leadership development, Jeff Garrison, of JCG Consulting, recently sent me an article that appeared in the January 2009 edition of Harvard Business Review. The title of the article, Women and the Vision Thing, looked at a survey that found that as a group, women scored higher than men in many areas of leadership. The one critical area where they did not score as well was in the area of “envisioning – the ability to recognize new opportunities and trends in the environment and develop a new strategic direction for an enterprise.”

The article offered three possible reasons for this, but it’s the first I’d like you to consider today: the idea that women may use a different process than men for shaping the future. In other words, maybe we’re not recognizing a woman’s ability to be a visionary, because “visionary” doesn’t look the way we are used to seeing it.

If a woman’s process is to bring together her entire team to strategically plan for the future, is she less visionary because she includes the entire team?

I’ve written before about how a different way of leading doesn’t necessarily mean it’s the wrong way of leading. It’s important to look at results to see whether a method is “wrong” or simply different. If a department headed by a woman is thriving, growing, and moving forward, how can it be said that she is not visionary, even if she credits her team with working well together to achieve results?

What does a visionary leader look like?

Helping Girls Become Strong Women

In the last post, I talked about raising strong girls/women, noting that we don’t have to ban “girly” things to raise strong women, anymore than we have to ban “manly” things to raise nurturing boys. Today, I’ll talk about what that has to do with women’s leadership.

When women first began assuming leadership roles in Corporate America, they tried to be like men, even to the point of wearing a suit and tie (albeit a modified one). However, the “command and control” model wasn’t really working for women, because that’s not how women typically work. Not that women never use that model, and not that they can’t; it’s just that when you analyze women’s leadership style over a large population, that’s not the model that stands out.

Women tend to be more collaborative, and have what is now referred to as a more transformative style of leadership. The interesting thing is, research is showing that this type of leadership can, in many cases, be more successful than the traditional command-and-control model. Strength of leadership is demonstrated most clearly in successful leadership.

All of this leads to the conclusion that if we allow girls to develop their natural strengths and interests (whether that means playing Barbies or baseball), while encouraging them to try new things, we will help them to naturally develop into strong leaders. Trying to force them into a model that does not suit them creates only weakness.

So relax. Introduce your daughter to a wide variety of experiences, and then let her take the lead in developing her interests and gifts.