Coverage of Dell’s Corporate Responsibility Report [PDF], released last week, has focused largely on the company’s environmental achievements – like cutting emissions, cutting waste, and increasing recyclable packaging. But the prominence diversity receives within the report is also worth noting.

The company dedicates several pages to its people. And the “people” section not merely a cursory “health and safety” paragraph, or some glossy photos of corporate volunteer work (although both of these topics are covered). Based on the information contained in the report, Dell is a firm supporter of workplace diversity.

It says, “When we combine our diverse experiences and creativity, we create a culture that inspires winning, where we all can embrace and live our purpose in everything we do.”

The company understands that celebrating diversity is a cornerstone for success in today’s economy. But Dell does more than deliver lip service to diversity – it goes into detail on the metrics surrounding its diversity efforts.

Diversity at Dell: The Numbers

The report gives a top-level assessment of where the company stands in terms of diversity.

A table toward the beginning of the report lists the percentages of women on its board of directors, people of color on its board of directors, women team members, women managers, people of color team members, and people of color managers going back 3 fiscal years, so readers can track the company’s progress. The table also gives the percentage of employee resource group participation and the number of employee resource group locations going back 2 fiscal years.

The numbers give a clear view of what the company has achieved – and the work it has left. For example, last year the percentage of women on Dell’s board of directors was 18%. This year it’s 9%, due, the report indicates, to the resignation of one of its female directors. Without saying so, the report shows that the company now has only 1 woman on its board of directors. But, the transparency in this matter is refreshing – and Dell acknowledges that it can do better.

As Founder and CEO Michael Dell wrote in his opening letter, “We’re proud of these accomplishments, and we understand there will always be more to do.”

Inclusion vs. Diversity

The report also features in interesting discussion on the difference between diversity and inclusion. First of all, the company strives to build diversity in its workforce and leadership. The report says:

“When we combine our diverse experiences and creativity, we create a culture that inspires winning, where we all can embrace and live our purpose in everything we do.”

But, according to Dell, diversity is only the first step – inclusion is the big picture goal. The report continues:

“Each team member brings remarkably different talents, perspectives, and life and career experiences to help us achieve our purpose for our customers. We believe that for our team members to do their best work, a commitment to a culture of inclusion is essential. Inclusion is an environment where people feel valued, supported, respected, involved and engaged.”

The company has taken significant steps toward promoting a culture of inclusion – with the inclusion initiative headed by Michael Dell himself, chairing Dell’s Global Diversity Council and hosting company-wide meetings for Employee Resource Groups. The company has also hired Alexis Herman, a former U.S. Secretary of Labor to work with Dell’s Global Diversity Council and its Diversity Policy and Governance Council to advise the company on diversity efforts.

Dell has been recognized by Working Mother as one of the Best Companies to Work For as well as retained a perfect score with the Human Rights Campaign for the past 6 years.

Dubbed the ‘opt out revolution’ by the New York Times, the phrase refers to the mass exodus of highly educated professional women from the workforce when they become mothers. These women presumably made a conscious choice to forgo earnings for the luxury of raising their children themselves. Is the opt-out revolution a proven phenomenon, or is it just media hype?

Women Are Not Abandoning the Workplace: The Facts

According to 2007 Census Bureau data, only about 26 percent of mothers with a college degree stay home, while more than 40 percent of mothers lacking high school diplomas are at home. College-educated women are more successful in combining work and family than other groups in part because they tend to have the resources to pay for child care and other help.

Research has shown that thehappiest couples are upper-middle-class, two-career couples. They report three times the marital contentment of the next happiest group — working- and middle-class families who favor a traditional division of labor and have only one breadwinner.

Better educated women are more likely to be in the labor force than less educated women. Raising children while building a serious career is hard for women, and when presented with the choice, many women opt for the latter. Half of Germany’s female scientists, for example, reportedly do not have children.

In 2001, economist Sylvia Ann Hewlett studied high-achieving women, defined as being both high-earners and “super-credentialed” — with graduate degrees, for example — and found that the more women earned, the more likely they were to be single and without children.

‘Opt Out’ or ‘Pushed Out’?

Many women who remain employed nonetheless step off the fast track, working part time, as independent contractors, or full time on the so-called “mommy track.”

In a 2004 study of highly qualified women, 86 percent said work-related reasons, including workplace inflexibility, were key considerations in their decisions to quit. In a 2006, the Economist claimed that “women remain the world’s most under-utilized resource.” “To make full use of their national pools of female talent,” the article stated, “governments need to remove obstacles that make it hard for women to combine work with having children,” such as “parental leave and child care, allowing more flexible working hours, and reforming tax and social-security systems that create disincentives for women to work.”

Most mothers do not opt out; they are pushed out by workplace inflexibility, the lack of family support, and workplace bias against mothers. Dr. June Robinson, a Professor at Northwestern University Medical School, observes that “it is really unfortunate that this country has not found a way to provide childcare. In Scandinavia, for example, it is taken care of. No one is made to feel guilty for leaving their child in professional childcare services. They don’t have to scramble around to find a… nanny to care for their children.”

Women’s Economic Jeopardy

A 2005 study published in the Industrial and Labor Relations Review found that women experienced a significant negative effect on wages even 20 years after a career interruption. The Center for Work-Life Policy found that women lose an average of 18 percent of their earning power when they temporarily leave the work force. Women in business sectors lose 28 percent.

The American economy has lots of good, long-hours jobs, but part time jobs tend to be hard to find, dead end, and low paid. “I felt like I threw away my career with the placenta,” said one anonymous lawyer, who returned to work part time after giving birth. The economic penalty associated with part-time work is much harsher in the United States than in Europe. Women who work part time in teh US earn 21 percent less per hour than full timers, a penalty seven times higher than in Sweden and more than twice as high as in the UK. On average, according to The American Prospect, “people who work 44 hours per week in the United States earn more than twice what those working 34 hours per week earn.”

The United States cannot maintain its competitiveness if it continues to pay large sums to educate the many women who then find themselves “deskilled” —driven out of good jobs and into less good ones — by inflexible workplaces and family responsibilities discrimination.

The untold story is that mothers are pushed out of the paid workforce by inflexible workplaces, discrimination, and the lack of public policy to support working families creates challenges for employers and policymakers alike. The key message for employers is that they need to match today’s workplace to today’s workforce. For policymakers, the key message is that working families need greater support and that, without them, U.S. competitiveness in a rapidly globalizing world is at risk.

Better Educated Women Work More

Women with more education are less likely to leave the labor force, and tend to work more hours, than women with less education.

Why do more highly educated women tend to work more? They have more to lose by passing up employment: As economists would say, their opportunity costs of eschewing employment are higher. Being a waitress is not as attractive a career track as being a middle-level manager or professional, and quality childcare is much more affordable for an executive or a lawyer than for a waitress.

College-educated women have flooded into high-paying, high-status and traditionally male dominated careers, whereas female high-school drop outs are much more likely to be stuck in low-paid, dead-end sex-segregated jobs.

Education fuels employment: Women with more education are more likely to be employed and to work more hours — a strong and consistent trend that the Opt Out story ignores.

In a time when companies are rebuilding their business models to include a more diverse workforce, financial corporations are paying attention. Black Enterprise magazine recently released its list of the best companies for diversity, a list which consists of companies that the magazine believes have achieved a high level of inclusion of minority individuals – including race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. The Best Companies for Diversity list was made through surveys of the top 1,000 publicly traded companies, focusing on technology, sales, marketing, and human resources. Below is a roundup of BE’s five top financial companies in diversity.

Northern Trust

Named one of the 100 Best Companies for Working Mothers and one of the top 50 Companies for Executive Women, the Chicago based financial company boasts not only an annual Chairman’s Diversity Advocate Award Program which recognizes employees who make contributions to diversity efforts, but Diversity of Work training to encourage work groups to value their people and their contributions.

Director of Global Diversity and Inclusion Mark David Welch promises progressiveness and training with the support of diversity councils. “Northern Trust has long recognized the invaluable role of diversity, and this recognition is a testament to our belief that fostering a globally diverse and inclusive workforce is fundamental to our success as a business enterprise and community advocate.”

The company also gives priority to programs in diverse neighborhoods while offering a broad variety of business groups including Women in Leadership, the TNTPride (LGBT) Community, and the Black Business Resource Council. All combined, this makes Northern Trust an inclusive culture that enables the company to hire and retain a diverse workforce – which Welch says leads to better ideas and innovations and brings out the best in our employees.

Comerica Inc.

Leslie Sabbath, Senior Vice President for Employee Relations of Comerica emphasizes that “diversity is a core value and a key business driver. [It] serves to remind employees, customers and others with an interest in your company that diversity is a priority.”

Besides working under a diversity commitment, Comerica strives to embrace all people throughout its workforce, its community, and its nearby schools by actively recruiting in diverse networks. The company earned a spot on the 2010 DiversityInc “Top 50 Companies for Diversity” list, ranking 45th overall.  In addition, Hispanic Business magazine ranked Comerica No. 1 for Supplier Diversity.  

The company also offers the Comerica Supplier Diversity Program which fosters the growth of small and minority-owned companies across the United States. By assisting these small companies, Comerica not only helps the communities they are in but builds minority suppliers in business.

American Express

Thirty-five percent of this company’s workforce is black, Latino, and Asian while providing 13 employee networks including the Black and Asian Network, the Jewish Employee Network, the Disabilities Awareness network, the GLBT Employee Network, and the Muslim Employee Network. The company also offers benefits for same-sex partners for it employees.

American Express is among the top 50 companies on DiversityInc and has remained on Working Mother’s list of leading companies for women since 2004. The company’s Blue Box Diversity Councils, which are made up of employees at all levels and positions, continuously change and update the company’s overall diversity vision and policy. In addition, they monitor American Express’ progress against other leading companies while managing the best practices. Primary areas of focus include development and environment, supplier diversity and selection and hiring.

Bank of America

DiversityInc’s ninth highest company for overall diversity is also the second highest company for GLBT employees on the list. This company offers a Diversity & Inclusion Learning Curriculum, as well as a variety of groups that plan and implement diversity approaches. The Diversity Advisory Council (DAC) develops and executes company-wide initiatives while the Diversity Business Councils (DBCs) which are made up of 29 separate groups, tackle diversity issues and come up with strategies to fix problems and create a work place that is comfortable to all employees. The company’s volunteer network, Team Bank America, is made up of 50 diversity networks that help organize diversity and cultural awareness activities in the community. These networks are designed to help communicate the importance of diversity within the company from presentations about sexual orientation to exercises in teamwork.

“I can’t emphasize enough just how important—and real—diversity is at Bank of America. For us, diversity is all about inclusion. It’s not just about gender. It’s not just about ethnicity,” says Geri Thomas, the Global Diversity and Inclusion Executive. “Diversity and inclusion means respecting and valuing all nationalities, cultures, religions, sexual orientation, economic and social backgrounds and disabilities. By working with our differences, we can develop innovative products for our customers and a unique environment for our associates.”

Fannie Mae

Fannie Mae has historically been one of the most diverse companies in the financial world. Even as the mortgage bubble burst, they continued to be among the best companies hiring minorities and creating an inclusive work environment. In 2007, the company was in DiversityBusiness.com’s top 50 corporations for multicultural business opportunities and last year they were named a notable company for diversity by DiversityInc. Fannie Mae was recognized as one of the 50 Best Companies for Latinas to work in the United States by LATINA Style for 2009 – the eighth year in a row.

Recent estimates indicate that minorities, including immigrants, will account for 68 percent of household growth over the period 2005-2015. Fannie May says it is working not only to save families from foreclosure, but preparing for future homeowners by understanding everyone’s own specific needs. To meet these needs, Fannie Mae’s Office of Diversity and Inclusion develops initiatives to support increased diversity in the financial industry through internships, scholarships, and other programs. The company is also dedicated to finding opportunities that align with corporate efforts aimed at foreclosure prevention and lending in communities of color.

his year, 305 businesses reached a 100 percent rating on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index, a tool used to rate businesses on their treatment of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender employees, investors and consumers. Last year 260 companies made it to the 100 percent rating. Though a promising increase, this does not mean that everything is hunky dory when it comes to the workplace.

A 2009 nationwide study by the Human Rights Campaign Foundation revealed that 51 percent of GLBT employees hide their identity at work, which leads to “increased stress, less productivity and the inability to participate in everyday conversations.” And when asked what a positive work environment would be like, GLBT employees said that it would be one “in which they feel free to be themselves, voice their opinions, engage openly in non-work-related conversations, feel safe from discrimination and believe they are valued, accepted and part of a team.”

So how can managers better ensure this environment for GLBT employees? By taking small steps that can grow off each other, creating an environment in which employees can feel free to be who they are.

1. Be Aware of Company Demographics

Creating a work environment in which GLBT employees can be true and honest about who are does not happen overnight. Many employers are required to provide the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, an annual count of their employees by job, race, gender, ethnicity and sometimes military and disability status. More recently, employers are beginning to collect employees’ gender identity and sexual orientation stats. With the information gathered, thousands of employers have improved their policies, though according to a report generated by the GLBT Self-ID Community of Practice, little evidence that these policies have worked exist.

To understand the diversity of a workforce, its components need to be known. By having voluntary anonymous engagement surveys and confidential employee records, employers can “illuminate organizational deficiencies affecting employee recruitment, retention and productivity,” of GLBT employees. By being aware of their employees, managers can begin to understand and appreciate their diverse workforce.

2. Know your policies

Forty-one percent of Fortune 500 and 25 percent of Fortune 1000 companies have policies protecting transgender employees from discrimination. Why? What are the details and are they known throughout the company? If an employer or manager cannot answer these questions about their own company, they cannot create an open environment.

Managers should be knowledgeable in all corporate policies regarding GLBT. By showing an understanding and objectivity to the company nondiscrimination policies, managers can become an example of how others in the company should act.

3. Create your own policy

According to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Action Fund, which conducted a six-month joint-effort survey, another way for employers to be more inclusive is to implement their own nondiscrimination policies in addition to the local, state and federal laws, or the complete lack thereof in many cases.

This shows that the company is willing to make a decision against the status quo. When companies have their own policy it’s a good way to gauge the measure of inclusion.

Comprehensive nondiscrimination policies are among the first things potential GLBT employees look for in a company, which can help induce new hires and reduce turnover.

4. Change your approach

This can begin very small, simply by rewording specific phrases in workplace conversations. Managers should never single someone out with descriptions or traits. Using inclusive language such as “guest” instead of “spouse” is the key. Gender specific or words that have unspoken underlying meanings should be avoided.

Placing GLBT information and events clearly on the company’s website or newsletter can also show more openness. And employers can promote diversity in the workplace through programs and focus groups in which participants can talk about what diversity means and “what inclusion looks like” in practice and not just policy. By doing so the employer is showing that he or she recognizes the different employees that make up the company and a desire to include them all.

5. Sponsor or endorse local GLBT events

The Task Force Action Fund’s findings also illuminated that companies who engage in the community and offer financial or volunteer resources to GLBT events show their employees and everyone else that they are “open to all people, including those not working for them.”

Employers can be visibly inclusive by supporting causes that local GLBT employees care about. And because of the recession, more and more consumers are spending locally to boost their local economy, which helps these local groups.

The key is to start small. Though it may be a more gradual process, these small steps can help managers create a more lasting and inclusive change in their workplace.

Last week Evolved Employer featured an article on the importance of top-level support for corporations working toward social progress, given the trends and uncertainties expected to characterize the next decade. McKinsey and CECP showed why CEOs need to strongly lead their companies’ CSR efforts moving forward, and more importantly those efforts must become integral to the company’s business strategy for them to be successful.

Today, we feature several CEOs who are doing just that, regarding the sphere of gender equality. These CEOs, founding signatories of the UN’s Women’s Empowerment Principles [PDF] understand the importance of bold leadership for affecting real change.

During the June 21 release of the first 39 signers, UNIFEM Executive Director Inés Alberdi said:

“These initial signers of the CEO Statement are practicing the very first Women’s Empowerment Principle that leadership promotes gender equality. These executives are affirming the high-level support necessary for the Women’s Empowerment Principles to gain traction in individual companies and their cultures.”

These CEOs serve not just as leaders for their individual companies, but as leaders on the gender equality issue amongst the CEO community as well.

The Empowerment Principles

Released in March as a partnership between the UN Global Compact and UNIFEM, the principles “offer practical guidance to business and the private sector on how to empower women in the workplace, marketplace and community,” according to UNIFEM.

Additionally, the principles, subtitled Equality Means Business, focus on the business case for gender equality and are “informed by real-life business practices and input gathered from across the globe.”

The principles are:
1. Establish high-level corporate leadership for gender equality.
2. Treat all women and men fairly at work – respect and support human rights and nondiscrimination.
3. Ensure the health, safety and well-being of all women and men workers.
4. Promote education, training and professional development for women.
5. Implement enterprise development, supply chain and marketing practices that empower women.
6. Promote equality through community initiatives and advocacy.
7. Measure and publicly report on progress to achieve gender equality.

Support from the Top – Five CEOs Who See Gender Equality as Talent Management

But the question remains: Why should corporations publicize their support for the issue, when governments and NGOs are already taking it seriously? One reason is that employees (and not just female ones) expect their companies to work toward these issues.

Says Ben Verwaayen [PDF], CEO, Alcatel-Lucent, “We need to embrace new thinking, new ways of rebuilding our societies, economies and businesses. This takes innovation and the energy of all people.” He continued, “We endorse these principles and are committed to living up to them. Our employees – women and men – expect it, and our customers and investors depend on it.”

At Deloitte, diversity is seen as a tool for talent management. According to James H. Quigley, CEO of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, “Harnessing strength from a variety of backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives allows Deloitte member firm professionals to bring a more diverse perspective to their client engagements, as well as create a culture that is a magnet for talent.”

John Anderson, President and CEO, Levi Strauss & Co. said, “By investing in access to proper health care, a safe, nondiscriminatory work environment and opportunities for asset building targeted to women, we’re not only investing in our workers, we’re investing in a healthy and sustainable workplace for all.”

Helmy Abouleish, Chief Executive Officer, SEKEM Group sees gender diversity as a means for attracting and retaining top talent. He said, “…To compete in the global economy, we need to develop the best talents both male and female. If we continue to neglect the potential of [Egypt's] 49% female population, this means we miss out on 49% of our nation’s best people.”

Finally, Barbara J. Krumsiek, President, CEO and Chair, Calvert Group, Ltd. highlighted the business case for gender equality at work. She said, “For Calvert, gender equality is an important aspiration for our own business as well as the companies in which we invest. In order for companies to reach their full potential, they must create an environment in which women are treated equally, where they hold key leadership positions, and are full participants in decision making.”

These five CEOs see gender equality as a means not just for impressing shareholders or customers, but as a way to attract, retain, and motivate high-performing employees in an an ever more competitive personnel market.

It’s no secret that women control a large share of purchasing power. For example, as noted at the 2009 World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, women control over 80% of consumer spending. And, as HDTV magazine recently reported, women’s spending on consumer electronics is increasing. This year, the article reveals, “Women spent, on average, $631 on consumer electronics, up $73 from 2009.”

Yet, the consumer electronic retail market has always been a bit male-centric (think man-cave versus family room). In 2005, Julie Gilbert, then a Best Buy vice president, set out to improve the company’s revenue by bringing in more female staff. The success of her WOLF program shows the valuable link between the retention of women employees and the spending power of women consumers.

Best Buy: The Situation

In 2005, an analysis of Best Buy’s customer data revealed that the company was missing out female technology spending – and analysis of store staffing showed a connection. A case study on the program explains:

“Women spent $90 billion on technology in 2005 (approximately 45% of consumer electronics purchases) – but only comprised 36% of Best Buy revenue. In addition, there was data showing that comparative store profits were higher in stores that employed more women: Where the staff was comprised of 5 men for every woman, the comparative store profits were on average 5% higher; when the ratio was 4 to 1, profits were up 7%, and when the ratio was 3 to 1, store profits increased by 10%.”

Stores with more female employees produced more profit. The solution seemed simple – put more women in the stores. But it wasn’t that simple. The case study explains Gilbert’s findings:

“…there was a higher turnover of women than of men in every department. In some cases, the rate of women leaving was more than 200% higher than that of men. Lastly, she looked at the recruitment of women. She noticed that 91% of the women were at ranks below supervisor. No female executives existed in the retail field and the highest ranking woman was a district manager.”

With high female turnover, low female retention, and few women in leadership positions, getting more women into Best Buy stores (both to work and to shop) was going to require more than a simple hiring push.

The WOLF Program

Inspired by the loyalty, cooperation, and collaboration of wolves in the wild, Gilbert named her three part plan WOLF. She explained:

“I built the business plan the next day, focusing on building this innovation movement and targeting three business metrics that would remain valid: (1) female revenue, (2) internal female retention, and (3) internal female recruitment. I knew that there was something there. …As any entrepreneur would, I just went ahead and started talking about my vision of a new day – inside the company – and the architecture I was building to make it happen for women.”

The first part of her program was the organization of WOLF Packs. According to the case study, “Each pack consisted of 25 female and 2 male Best Buy employees with an 80% representation from retail and 20% from corporate.” This would enable members of the retail and corporate environments to gain better understanding of each others the motivations and requirements.

As the program grew, Gilbert introduced WOLF Omega teams: “women who did not work for the company (in effect, female consumers) – to help reinvent the company in partnership with the company’s female employees.” The teams also collaborated with Best Buy staff to create community outreach programs and events.

Measuring WOLF Results

By all accounts the WOLF program has been a success for Best Buy. In addition to increasing female leadership, the case study explains, “Revenue generated by females increased by more than $4.4 billion in less than five years; female market share increased from Q1 2006: 14.7% to Q1 2008: 17.1%” and “Female turnover was reduced company-wide by over 5% each year, female recruits increased by more than 37% in areas where WOLF Packs existed and the number of women in the company grew by more than 18%.”

The program shows the link between employee engagement and revenue – by better connecting with female employees, Best Buy was better able to reach its female customers, tapping into this important segment of consumer shoppers.

By Nicki Gilmour, Founder and CEO of Evolved People Media, LLC

In March 2010, the UN’s Commission on the Status of Women will undertake a fifteen-year review of the implementation of the Beijing Declaration. It was at this meeting in China that a group of 50,000 people representing 189 governments actively agreed a goal to increase women in leadership positions.

The magic number became known as the 30% solution, the idea being that once women reached a Critical Mass in an organization, people would stop seeing them as women and start evaluating their work as managers. This theory was originally developed more than 40 years ago by Harvard academic Rosabeth Moss Kanter in her book Men and Women of the Corporation.

Fifteen years after the Beijing Declaration, Norway is the only country to have progressed towards this goal via legislation – championed by someone who definitely doesn’t meet the profile of a typical feminist. Norwegian politician Ansgar Gabrielsen is a Pentecostal Christian, and an archetypal alpha-male businessman. His reasons seem logical and resource driven.

“What’s the point in pouring a fortune into educating girls, and then watching them exceed boys at almost every level, if, when it comes to appointing business leaders in top companies, these are drawn from just half the population – friends who have been recruited on fishing and hunting trips or from within a small circle of acquaintances?” he says. “It’s all about tapping into valuable under-utilised resources.”

How to Build a Corporate-Driven Critical Mass Solution

France recently followed with a quota-based approach. And the UK is discussing quotas as a possibility with most people agreeing that the organic growth just isn’t there for getting women in the pipeline.

Interestingly, the US experts have the most disparity in opinion on how to achieve more female leaders. A quota system just does not culturally fit well and women themselves have voiced their concern of being accused publicly or otherwise of being given the job, under a quota system, “just because they are a women.”

Yet, Norway’s success shows that quotas do actually work. So, instead of letting politics and lexicon kill the momentum of this important issue, we need to implement a Critical Mass system that works within the cultural values of the US or the UK.

First, let’s dismiss outright government enforced quotas and consider CEO enforced targets as a way to get us to the desired Critical Mass of women in management and leadership positions. The effect of Critical Mass would mean it wouldn’t be unusual to have a female boss or to perceive a leader as someone who could be wearing a skirt; we wouldn’t automatically accredit better decision-making to the male brain. We need to think of Critical Mass is a business strategy that results in breaking “Group Think,” which contributed heavily to the 2008 financial crisis.

In fact, Jacki Zehner and the National Council for Research on Women have been advocating the Critical Mass principle and have completed a full research document for the Fund Management Industry (which we reported on back in July this year) “Women in Fund Management: A Roadmap for Achieving Critical Mass and Why It Matters.” Zehner believes that that when women are present at decision making tables in sufficient numbers the quality of the decision making improves and group think can be minimized.

“I can think of no other action that would have greater positive corporate impact then the adoption of a voluntary Critical Mass Principle for corporate boards of publicly traded companies,” Zehner says. “A large amount of research suggests that when talented women are added in sufficient numbers the quality of overall decision-making improves. There is a proven and measure positive correlation between the number of senior women at an organization and their stock price and performance.”

Why Haven’t We Gotten Close to Achieving Critical Mass?

Shifra Bronznick, Founding President, Advancing Women Professionals and the Jewish Community, commented to me at an event for The White House Project that “We have all the research and data we need to show that beyond a shadow of a doubt when women are in leadership, the bottom line improves, stakeholder value improves. What is not demonstrated here is the will to let the data drive strategy.”

There are enough women to sit on boards, and yet they only make up a small percentage of board seats. So, in order to solve the problem of increasing female leadership, we must look to the hiring processes primarily and then to the development attention given to women executives throughout their career.

The 2 main obstacles to Critical Mass are:

1. Making sure enough women get opportunities at mid level points in their career so they have the hard skills to be chosen for senior leadership.Joanne Cavallara of De Cava Consulting said she and her fellow corporate board committee members at The Boston Club are aware of the ad hoc reasons behind the lack of female representation in the executive ranks and on boards — cultural mores and the tenacious association between leadership and masculinity, as well as women’s own obligations and priorities, all of which are evident in the workplace. But conversations must begin between those who are concerned about this lack and those who have the power to change things. She says, “I’m trying to start conversations with diversity and HR executives about how we [can] ensure that women, particularly women at the mid levels, are getting the kinds of developmental assignments they typically don’t get offered.”

   Additionally, further research by DDI, in its work “Holding Women Back,” suggests that organisational support, weak for both sexes as they change jobs, decreases more for women as they move up the career ladder. DDI also found a male bias embedded in HR policies that promote talent and identify future leaders.

2. Accountability is lacking. HR professionals do not adhere to targets in the way that other departments of a company do. The most damaging reason for this is because the CEO and top executives aren’t asking tough questions. Diversity isn’t considered, in most cases, a key performance indicator for the health of the business and thereby offers a chance for unconscious bias to come into play. In fact, as Anthony Hesketh of the Lancaster University Management School and co-author of, “Mismanaging Talent,” acknowledges, the brightest and best are not only judged on their abilities and past achievements but by a more subjective measure of their likely fit, based on the recruiters’ own preconceptions of worth.Linda Whelan Tarr, author of Women Lead the Way comments,
   

   “Accountability is essential if we are going to reach a Critical Mass of women in decision-making. We are a long way from the tipping point of the 30% solution when women’s ideas and experience is valued. Targets and a monitoring process are key. Every successful business endeavor operates from clear benchmarks. Somehow when we talk about targets for more women at the table to produce a healthier bottom line, this has been mis-labeled with a scare word, “quotas” and then dismissed. Targets for more women at the table to improve business outcomes is simply a smart business strategy.”

How does your company monitor such processes? Only a handful do it properly and until that is addressed, all talent development and hiring is at the mercy of the HR department, some without dedicated diversity teams to ensure targets are met at every level. We need measurement so that the default excuse of “we hired the best person for the job” is more than hiring someone who looks like the next guy. Critical Mass means the new hire is just as likely to look like the next girl too.

The Economist kicked off the year with Rosie the Riveter on the cover, proclaiming “We did it.” What exactly did we do?

Well, we became 50% of the workforce, generally, across all industries. We can interpret that in two ways, either as a positive advancement for women as they are able to have economic freedom by earning their own wage or that that women have to work to support themselves and their families; it does not necessary mean that we are actually getting somewhere as leaders and managers in equal numbers to men.

I have to be honest. I had to check that I wasn’t reading an old copy of the Economist from January 1980 when I read the words, “The revolution has been achieved with only a modicum of friction. Men have, by and large welcomed women’s invasion of the workplace.” Invasion of the workplace? Last time I checked, going to work to try and strategically improve your processes, and therefore the company as a whole, by delivering results in whichever area you work isn’t like invading Poland.

A quick look at the Economist’s stats would suggest that gender equality is still a way off.

1. Women make up less than 13% of board members in America.
2. 2% of Fortune 500 companies are run by women and 5% of companies listed on the UK’s FTSE index are run by women.
3. Only 50% of women who undertake MBAs remain in the workplace after childbirth, according to Marianne Bertrand of The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, in her work “Why Laura Isn’t CEO.”
4. Goldman Sachs calculates that increasing women’s participation in the labor market will boost GDP by 21% in Italy, 19% in Spain, 16% in Japan, 9% in the US, France and Germany and finally by 8% in the UK.

The New Feminism?

The Economist continues with Schumpeter’s out of touch op-ed – a call to ignore what he terms “the new feminism,” and what I would consider to be respected academic work done by Alison Maitland and Avivah Wittenberg-Cox.

Their work encourages recognizing that women are different, and that gains can be made if we stop expecting women to act like men and understand there is more to be gained from diversity of thought – which has actually been proven to increase financial performance of a company.

As explained by Beth Brooke, Global Vice Chair of Ernst and Young, at the White House Project Benchmarks Study release breakfast here in New York:

“We highlight several research studies in our recent Groundbreakers report that show with a critical mass of women on a board, the organization achieves better financial performance and that a diverse group will outperform a homogeneous group of experts.”

Even McKinsey is not spared by the magazine. Its research on leadership performance (which shows that women regularly execute five of the nine leadership behaviors that lead to corporate success more frequently than men) is belittled as Schumpeter seems to think he is actually updating us on some new burgeoning trend – that women leaders behaving as women, not men, is “gaining followers in powerful places.” He imparts some final advice involving Margaret Thatcher as the ultimate role model, that “Women would be well advised to ignore the siren voices of new feminism. It would be a grave mistake to abandon old-fashioned meritocracy just at the time when it is turning to women’s advantage.”

Meritocracy. Good. Is my work is done here on theglasshammer.com then? Are you kidding? Several recent surveys conducted by non–profits and workplace consultants suggest we are far from equality. The White House Project Benchmarks Study shows that women represent 18% of leaders across 10 sectors in industry, with even fewer women taking the lead in Guns (military), Games (sport), and God (religion). The media myth of equal numbers is, in fact, meaningless, as is the continually repeated phrase “Mancession” due to 11.2% of men being unemployed, as opposed to a mere 8.6% of women (as quoted by the Economist). To me, this just reinforces the fact that men were in higher paid, more senior jobs to start with, since the cost-cutting began with the fat cats.

Questioning the “Choices” Myth

Then there is the good old default argument about the fairness of women earning less because they reproduce and then choose not to return to work.

Why they don’t return is simple, and boils down to two reasons. The first is that they can’t re-enter as they have lost their footing on the ladder; hence we have seen returner programs from progressive employers like Goldman Sachs, which pioneered a “returnship” for on-ramping female talent who had taken time out. (One headhunter once told me he puts any resume that has a break on it on pile B, which never is presented to the client.)

The second reason is that the workplace, for the most part, is set up in an unappealing manner based upon 1950s norms of hierarchy and patriarchy. It’s tiresome to give 100%, still be paid less, watch your male colleagues hang off your bosses door late at night asking for more clients, and watch deals happen on the golf course, from which you were excluded.

It’s not necessarily men’s fault and I am not advocating that we “fix the men” in the same way as some people suggest we must “fix the women”; it’s just the way the game has always been played and that is what must change if companies are serious about having female talent stay and continue to succeed. The heart of gender inequality lies firmly in workplace structure and unconscious bias which has been institutionalized and accepted as “just the way it is.” The problem starts with the way hiring is done: transactional box ticking, filling holes, and not strategically building pipeline or developing leaders (as, very often, the talent management function, the women’s group if the company has one, and the recruiting department have never actually met).

Changing the System

The real untapped issue lies with a new design of the workplace that is truly talent orientated and results-led. Flexible work shouldn’t be an issue and both men and women can have work/life fit and a glimpse of balance – to live their lives outside work, nurture the next generation, and, let’s face it, feel like we are not losing our minds in the endless juggle of modern day commitments and desires for leisure time.

Alison Maitland commented exclusively to theglasshammer.com:

“The old-fashioned meritocracy in which ‘Schumpeter’ puts such touching faith has unfortunately not delivered. This is evident from the persistent under-representation of women in senior jobs, which the Economist itself bemoans in its coverage.”

“As we explain in our book, Why Women Mean Business, companies need to ask why their own systems – which they perceive as being meritocratic – are failing to retain and promote women in larger numbers. Perhaps the ‘meritocracy’ on which they pride themselves is unconsciously skewed towards the dominant male norm. It’s assumed that because men have occupied positions of leadership for so long they are natural leaders – and women are not.”

“Business leaders increasingly say they want women to bring their different perspectives to the table, that they don’t want male clones. They could achieve this by questioning their own perceptions of what a leader should look like, which is based on the past, on what corporate leaders have been like, and open their eyes to the untapped talent of all kinds that is available to them and on which they will inevitably rely in the future.”

I couldn’t agree more.

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation recently released its list of the best companies to work for. These companies show a commitment to equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees.

The companies are scored based on the HRC Foundation’s Corporate Equality Index (CEI) which considers a number of criteria, including:

• Non-discrimination policy, diversity training — sexual orientation
• Non-discrimination policy, diversity training & benefits — gender identity or expression
  Partner benefits
• LGBT employee resource group / diversity council
• Engages in appropriate and respectful advertising and marketing, or sponsors LGBT community events or organizations
• Employer exhibits responsible behavior toward the LGBT community; does not engage in action that would undermine LGBT equality

According to HRC Foundation President Joe Salomonese, companies are increasingly recognizing that LGBT equality and inclusiveness programs are vital to employee retention. Even in this year’s tough economic climate, he writes, “The number of top-rated businesses continues to climb, reaching an unprecedented 305 businesses — a net increase of 45 over last year — representing more than 9.3-million full-time employees.”

He continued, “For every loss from bankruptcy or acquisition, several new businesses reached 100 percent.”

That so many companies are committed to creating an inclusive and diverse workplace shows their acknowledgment that a diverse workforce not only allows for happy employees, but it is good for the strength and development of the organization at large.

According to Robert Rigby-Hall, senior vice president, Global Human Resources at top scoring LexisNexis Group, “It is the diversity of our people and their ideas that creates strength for our business and customers around the world.”

Bob Bloss, senior vice president – human resources at Hallmark, another top scorer, echoed Rigby-Hall’s sentiments. “Our goal is to continue to create an environment in which diversity is embraced and diverse traits are leveraged as strengths, where every employee can perform to his or her potential, and in which his or her contributions are respected and appreciated.”

While many of the United States’ best companies recognized the benefits of supporting LGBT individuals within their workforce, several notable companies did not score very high, or even make the list.

The report states, “ExxonMobil continues to lose points for resisting shareholder pressure to amend its non-discrimination policies. Similarly, two other companies continued to oppose shareholder resolutions to amend their non-discrimination policies to include gender identity and lost points on their overall rating: Verizon Communications Inc. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc.”

That these top US companies continue to resist pressure from their own shareholders to embrace a diverse workforce reveals the continuing struggle of LGBT individuals to gain acceptance in the workplace. The growth of the HRC’s Foundations list this year shows a definite step in the right direction, but it also highlights the challenges ahead.

For the HRC Foundation’s full report on Best Places to Work, click here: http://www.hrc.org/documents/HRC_Corporate_Equality_Index_2010.pdf.

“One of the things I’m worried about is the impact of the economy on women’s initiatives,” says Carol Frohlinger, Esq. Frohlinger is the cofounder of Negotiating Women Inc. and co-author of “Her Place at the Table: A Woman’s Guide to Negotiating Five Key Challenges to Leadership Success.” Negotiating Women provides negotiation and leadership training for women at every stage of their career. graduating from law schools in equal numbers as men for the past 25 years.

As budgets are slashed at law firms nationwide, the fate of many employee programs, including women’s resource groups and initiatives, are uncertain. “Law firms, in particular, are fragile,” says Frohlinger. That’s because most women’s initiatives have only recently been started at legal firms. To help firms maintain the momentum of nascent initiatives, Negotiating Women, Inc. is launching the “Just Add Women® Meeting Toolkit Series”. This prepackaged program offers a solution for law firms and affinity groups that are committed to implementing professional development programs for women lawyers but can’t afford the time and money to create their own in this economy.

The Just Add Women® Toolkit comes with ready-made meeting agendas, acilitator’s guides, PowerPoint presentations, meeting checklist s and even sample email invitation describing the sessions. Topics include building a strategic network, positioning yourself for high visibility assignments, building client relationships and getting the resources you need. Negotiating Women, Inc. offers complimentary facilitator training for staff and organization members as part of the Just Add Women® Meeting Toolkit Series too. “I think people need to understand that support for this is critical,” says Frohlinger. “Women are crying out for substantive content.”

Betiayn Tursi, of Tursi Law Marketing Management and Co-Chair of the Women In Law Empowerment Forum (WILEF), which runs leadership programs for women in law, understands Frohlinger’s concern. “All of these women’s initiatives are being put on a back burner. And clearly now is the time to focus on professional development.” Tursi makes the case that cuts in professional development affect women lawyers more so than men because “women were short-shrifted for the longest time.”

Data from the National Association of Women Lawyers (NAWL) supports her claim. According to NAWL’s 2007 National Survey on Retention and Promotion of Women in Law Firms , men hold 92 percent of managing partner positions, 85 percent of the seats on firm governing committees, and 84 percent of equity partnership in the largest firms in the U.S. This, despite the fact that women have been

Jennifer Edgeworth is a partner with Hermes Sargent Bates (HSB), a Dallas-based litigation firm, and is actively involved in the women’s initiative group there. HSB’s group is open to all attorneys, both male and female. Forty-five percent of the firm’s 50 attorneys are women. Edgeworth says the Just Add Women ®Toolkit is intriguing because the kinds of programs it offers can be cost prohibitive for a firm the size of HSB. “Certainly the economy has affected how we analyze what kinds of programs we’re going to do,” says Edgeworth. However, she says the firm has not scaled back its programs. “We’re still doing programs but we’re more deliberate in the analysis of what value you see from it.”

Regarding value, Tursi says law firms that view women’s initiatives as an expense are short-sighted and that firms should take a three year approach to these programs when looking at the return on investment. “The problem,” she says, “is there is no instant gratification.” Tursi also believes there is no one-size-fits-all development program for both men and women. “I wouldn’t put a course on mentoring for boys and girls in the same room,” she says. “That goes for leadership too.” Tursi argues that men find mentors more easily than women in a field like law. This is most likely attributed to the much higher percentage of male partners than female partners in firms.

Edgeworth agrees that men and women approach things like mentoring, leadership and marketing differently. “A hunting outing is not going to be appealing to different women’s groups,” she says. Therefore, HSB offers other client development opportunities besides hunting and golf. The women’s initiative group has sponsored a variety of programs including Holiday Nails and Cocktails, where participants received spa services, and fundraising events for non-profit organizations.

According to Tursi, it’s the business development activities that will most help woman lawyers. “Women’s initiatives need to focus on business development and leadership,” says Tursi, “Period. Full stop.”