rome april 2012 wome blueprint
DESCRIPTION
Enterprise, Finance and Jobs for a New Humanity Morten Huse Professor of Organisation and Management, BI Norwegian Business School, Oslo and Tor Vergata University, Rome President European Academy of Management Catalyst Europe Advisory Board MemberTRANSCRIPT
Morten HuseVicariate of Rome, Ministry of Education and
LUMSABorgo Sant Angelo, Rome, 16. April 2012
Morten Huse Professor of Organisation and Management, BI Norwegian
Business School, Oslo and Tor Vergata University, Rome President European Academy of Management Catalyst Europe Advisory Board Member
08/04/23www.boardsandwine.net
Enhancing the role of women at the top of the business is crucial at this moment
Societal case arguments◦ Justice◦ Democracy◦ Participation◦ Gender equality◦ Conventions
UN Human Rights EU/EEA
Individual case arguments◦ Individual
development/career◦ Glass ceiling arguments
Business case arguments◦ Diversity
Women different than men◦ Larger knowledge base
More than 50% of the population are women
Use of knowledge in a small society
◦ Customer knowledge Women are the main
customers in several sectors◦ Men are often too passive
08/04/23www.boardsandwine.net
NORWAY – ONE OF THE MOST PROGRESSIVE COUNTRIES
Norway is considered one of the most progressive countries with regards to increasing the number of women on boards – thanks to it being an early adopter of legislation to force companies to recruit women to the boardroom.
Elizabeth Harrin (Financial Times, London)
FEMINISTS: BOLDEST MOVE ANYWHERE To many feminists, this is the boldest move
anywhere to breach one of the most durable barriers to gender equality
The Female Factor
Women in the boardroom The wrong way to
promote women Mandatory quotas do
more harm than good. But firms should make work more family-friendly
July 19th 2011
•Ruin the Norwegian Economy•There are not enough qualified women
08/04/23www.boardsandwine.net
40%
20%
10%
5%
1990 20081996 2002
Seminars
Saving banks on the stock exchange
Mentorship programs
Women networks
Law proposal hearings
25% 40%
Law proposed
Deadline for law
Law ratified
Law sanctions enforced
Data banks and registers
Arguments
Research
Percentage of women on boards in listed/publicly tradeable companies in Norway
Formal education
Multi-board directors 2000
Multi-board directors 2010
Women No women Independent
Mostly Professional Independent (including the “Golden Skirts”)
Men “Old boys network” Investors
Mostly “Gold Sacks” Investors (Women have replaced many multi-board men)
Principle- and facts- oriented golden skirts
Pragmatic business-oriented golden skirts
Aspiring golden skirts (Less experienced as decision-makers)
The analytics: “The young, smart and clever – having fact on the fingertips, often having mentors” (around 40 years)
The controllers: “The ambitious and pragmatic women – using the opportunities given by the law” (50 years +)
Experienced golden skirts (Experienced as decision-makers)
The decision makers: “The iron fists being used to fight – experience from top level politics” (50 years +)
The value creators: “The business experienced - being board members before the gender-balance law” (55 years +)
A snowball effect? Spain, France, Netherlands,
Italy, Belgium, Iceland, Finland
Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Portugal
New Zealand, Australia, UK, USA
China, Japan, Egypt, South Africa, etc
Norway Most business women at
first in principal negative, but after seeing the results in practice positive
Our earlier published research:◦ Bilimoria and Huse 1997,
Huse and Solberg 2006 Our recently published
research◦ Tacheva and Huse 2007,
Huse 2008, Huse, Nielsen and Hagen 2009, Nielsen and Huse 2010a+b, Torchia, Calabro and Huse 2010, Torchia, Calabro, Huse and Brogi 2010, Torchia, Calabro and Huse 2011
Our WOB Findings1. Defining value creation (vs. distribution?)
2. Board task differences (strategy, control, service?)
3. Deep level diversity (female, feminine, feminist?)
4. Tokenism (competence and preparation?)
5. Critical mass (adapting to culture?)
6. Gender related dynamics (baking cakes?)
7. Gender role stereotyping (the men?)
8. Using diversity (leadership?)
9. Evolution of a new discourse (box ticking?)
