Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Pros and cons of meritocracy
Advantage of affirmative action
Advantage of affirmative action
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Pros and cons of meritocracy
Quotas for female positions on corporate boards have been passed and are awaiting implementation for quite a few countries across Europe. Norway is the first one to impose a 40% quota to be met by 2015. France, Spain and Germany have similar laws, and European Parliament just finished voting last month favoring a similarly drafted law. These quotas are designed to rectify the extreme gender imbalance on corporate boards, which persists despite female advancements in education and workforce participation. In Europe, women make up only 12% of positions on boards in the top 300 European companies according to research by Russell Reynolds and the European Professional Women's Network1. Similarly, with only 16.1% of board positions held by women in U.S. Fortune 500 companies, debates about whether similar policy should be implemented in the U.S. arise as well2. Although mixed boards might make better decisions than monolithically male ones do, I believe that the quota system not only is a bad solution targeting a wrong problem, but also have potential drawbacks that could undermine the efficiency and quality of corporate governance. In this paper, I will first identify the underlying causes of the gender imbalance in the boardroom to explain why quota is not the right solution to the problem, and then examine the benefits and drawbacks of quotas to argue that quotas actually undermine value creation, thus shouldn’t be implemented in the U.S. and other countries.
I. Wrong solution targeting the wrong problem
The lack of women in corporate boardroom is only a symptom. It is a consequence of the huge underrepresentation of women at top executive levels. “Women account for 60% of new graduates in the EU, and enter many ...
... middle of paper ...
...g way to promote women. Mandatory quotas do more harm than good, but firms should make work more family-friendly.” The Economist. 21 Jul. 2011. Web.
6. Clark, Nicola. “Getting Women Into Boardrooms, by Law.” The New York Times. 27 Jan, 2010. Web
7. Joy, Lois, Nancy M. Carter, Harvey M. Wagner, and Sriram Narayanan. “The Bottom Line: Corporate Performance and Women's Representation on Boards.” Catalyst. The Chubb Corporation, 15 Oct. 2007. Web.
8. Sweigart, Anne. “Women on Board for Change: The Norway Model of Boardroom Quotas As a Tool For progress in the United States and Canada.” 32 Nw. J. Int’l L. & Bus. 81A. 2012
9. Chinwala, Yasmine. “Women Find Gender Is Still Barrier to Success.” FIN. News. Mar. 14, 2011
10. Kristula-Green, Noah. "Elite Schools Like Princeton Should Heed Bernanke on Merit."US News. U.S.News & World Report, 04 June 2013. Web. 06 Dec. 2013.
While the median weekly pay for women rose in the past decades, it is still largely inferior to the median weekly pay of men employed in the same jobs. This difference of pay also puts an additional burden on women who are expected to stay home when emergencies arise. They cannot in some cases pay for daycare or rely on their companies’ understanding that someone has to take care of the family obligations. In result, they are penalized when comes the time to find candidates for promotion and are seen as not as dependable as their male counterparts. Finally, women face a social bias against them that encompass gender, appearance and race. It effectively punishes them for reasons that are out of their own control and not related to their job performance and skills. Laws against gender-based discrimination, more flexible workplace arrangements and a change in our culture regarding women may help fight discrimination and help women reach their full potential in the workforce. By starting to allow for more flexibility, paying women on a comparable scale than the one used for men, and support women in their desire to take care of their families, corporations could set the tone for a fairer treatment of women in the
One important question that needs to be asked is, “what is equal?” Equality between sexes and race has been stressed and made law in the late nineteenth century, but even though laws have been made to protect woman from this discrimination, it still occurs frequently. Equal is being treated the same way and having the same opportunities no matter who one is. Big business has not given women the chance to be equal with men. One does not normally see a woman as the owner, or even the manager of a major corporation, these jobs consistently go to men. Traditi...
Women face discrimination in the workplace. Discrimination is defined as a behavioral activity is exhibited in how people treat members of other groups and in the decisions they make about others. In chapter 3 Race and Ethnicity in the United States discusses how discrimination not only effects positions in companies it also affects pay rates. Income is drastically different when it comes to men and women and only gets worse for women who are minorities. These women have broken through the glass ceiling in their corporations. “In 1991 the Glass Ceiling Commission was formed to help women and minorities, fight their derrepresentation in the workplace”. With this article and with research that is being done women are starting to break the glass ceiling that is holding them down. Women account for only 2.2% of Fortune 500 companies CEO roles. The number is shockingly low, less than 15 companies have women CEO’s in the 500 companies we look at that best fit our country’s
Positions of Power: How Female Ambition is Shaped by J.D. Nordell of Slate Magazine details the female disposition in the workplace. Nordell writes, “...women account for 35 percent of MBAs but only 2 percent of Fortune 500 CEOs. Women now make up 16 percent of congressional seats - and 0 percent of U.S. presidents…” (Nordell). The statistics provided above show an obvious discrepancy in the amount of influence women have in the workplace. A popular theory is that this discrepancy is caused by the influence of gender roles on the workplace - men are not taking women as seriously in the workplace. Females’ introduction into the major economy is still a relatively new concept, and the underlying archaic gender role that women should tend to the house and children is preventing women from being taken seriously by the men of the business world, and thus constraining their performance in the economy. This is further supported by the case of Ben Barres: “Recently, the transsexual neuroscientist Ben Barres, who has worked as both a woman and a man in science, noted that he is treated with more respect and interrupted less frequently now that he is a man” (Nordell). This further elaborates on the phenomenon that women are taken less seriously in the workplace. Considering the excerpts from Positions of Power: How Female Ambition is Shaped, it is easy
Also, the majority of women have been able to secure employment from traditionally female occupations such as teaching compared to male-dominated careers like engineering. Moreover, democratic country like the United States of America has recognized gender inequality as a fundamental issue and espouse equal right between men and women in contributing to social, economic and cultural life. Despite this improvement, gender inequality persists as women are not represented and treated equally in the workplace (Michialidis, Morphitou, & Theophylatou, 2012). The increasing number of women in the workplace has not provided equal opportunity for career advancement for females due to the way women are treated in an organization and the society. Also, attaining an executive position seem impossible for women due to the glass ceiling effects which defines the invisible and artificial barrier created by attitudinal and organizational prejudices, which inhibit women from attaining top executive positions (Wirth
Many laws and regulations are implemented everyday into our society, involving equal rights for all. But, even with being in the year 2015; there is still much discrimination and inequality seen throughout many different institutions. Gender inequality is defined as unequal treatment or perceptions of individuals based on gender. This has been seen for many decades now, revolving mainly against women. Throughout history to even today, men have always been seen as the stronger, faster, and harder working gender as opposed to women. Today, with more women being seen working at larger firms and corporations, we still see many obstacles and challenges that they must face. While many women have fought for equality in the workplace, it is still a
“The history of the Glass Ceiling Commission dates back to 1986 when Wall Street Journal reported a pattern of highly accomplished women being passed over for upper-level promotions due to an invisible barrier”. The term “glass-ceiling” first entered America’s public conversation almost two decades ago, when the Corporate Woman column from The Wall Street Journal identified this new phenomenon. “There seem to be an invisible –but impenetrable- barrier between women and the executive suite, preventing them from reaching the highest levels of the business world regardless of th...
Gender Diversity has been considered a key issue in the Corporate Governance and the details about how the organizations have worked on improving the women’s representation in the Boardroom composition has also been discussed. Several examples have been given about the board room composition of various companies and the number of female professionals in it.
Today, however, women have integrated themselves into every field of activity and every kind of industry smoothly and skillfully. Whether travelling twenty days of the month or accepting transfers, they are as performance-oriented, sincere, competent and persevering as their male counterparts, if not more. Their presence in the corporate world is now more a rule than an exception such that a feminist agenda and, in fact, any speci...
Leonard, Jonathan S. (1989) Women and Affirmative Action The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 3, No. 1, 61-75.
The argument for gender-diversity enhancing boardroom effectiveness and performance in listed companies has been made. The evidence herein is also very compelling. However, If gender-diversity is to enhance corporate governance in listed companies; then women appointees to directorship positions will be required to have suitable training, development, as well as experience. Furthermore, tokenism’ alone will not allow listed companies realize the tangible and intangible benefits of diversity, including gender diversity, in corporate governance.
In this paper I have shown how women differ from men. They differ in everything from sports and education to their home life, women are unequal. Steps need to be taken provide equality for the whole nation. Maybe not to long after our century mark, everyone in this country, male and female, will have the same opportunities and chances for advancement in every aspect.
Gender inequality is present in all aspects of human society, from culture, politics, and economic stand point to personal relationships. Gender inequality can be viewed as a major problem especially within the business world (Corporation, 2016). In the past, men are seen as leaders in all aspects. For example, men could work without any criticisms, they could participate in political issues and were given higher education. Women on the other hand, were given no political participation, criticized for working outside the household as they were responsible for chores such as takes care of their children, cooking or cleaning and given limited education compared to men. Although there are claims rights equality of women in 21st century and much has been written about it in the field of business (Player, 2013), but there is still a gap between male and female. This essay aims to explore the impact of gender inequality in business and will analyze the details in terms of the men are given high pay and specific jobs over women.
...d women’s biological purpose has provided men a source of comparative advantage in work. It is, therefore, natural for most companies to think that women cannot be as capable as men in terms of assuming strenuous or challenging positions because women, by default, become less participative and more vulnerable when they start to have family and children. Apparently, this situation has led to various gender discriminations in the labor market.
The Copé-Zimmermann legislation strictly speaking does not provide for a compulsory quota of 40% of women in French companies, but rather for a representation of at least 40% of each gender (art. L. 225-18-1 C.com regarding the board of directors, L. 225-69-1 and L. 226-4-1 C.com regarding the supervisory board of a two-tier management structure). However, it is apparent from the preparatory works that specifically women are targeted. Some have expressed their regret regarding the 40% threshold and would have preferred a complete equality with a threshold of 50% . It is true that the initi...