Is a company working-mother friendly if working moms aren’t fully represented in the corner office?
I asked this question yesterday when I got an email about Working Mother magazine’s list of 100 Best Companies. Great family-friendly list, but WHERE ARE ALL THE WOMEN LEADERS??!!
Working Mother comes up with a list of companies annually and their criteria is basically based on firms that offer “benefits like paid maternity leave, the ability to work from home and wellness programs, as well as programs that enhance financial well-being,” according to Carol Evans, president of Working Mother Media. “Our 100 Best are helping to reduce stress in the busy lives of working moms. These companies epitomize family-friendly support at its best.”
Most of the companies that made the list were familiar to me and I decided to go through the top ten on Working Mother’s list and figure out if these companies really put their money where they’re mouths are when it comes to women.
What I found was pretty pathetic. Women leaders are few and far between at these so-called “best” companies.
Among many of these “best” companies, women represent anywhere from zero percent to 30 percent of top executives.
To be fair, it’s not just these firms that don’t have women represented in any big way among the big jobs. Women are still under-represented throughout the corporate world.
In the U.S., only 20 percent of senior management positions at private companies are held by women, while 35 percent do not have any women in senior management at all.
This information came from a Grant Thornton study. Grant Thornton was one of the top ten best companies as recognized by Working Mother magazine in its report.
Alas, of the 12 individuals on the senior leadership team at Grant Thornton, only two were women.
And here’s a run down of the nine others on the list (I used the companies’ own websites to find corporate leaders and did not include board members in this overview. Women aren’t represented well on boards either, but that’s a whole other story.):
* Abbott has 18 senior members on its management team and only two are women.
* IBM has 18 executive officers, and only two are women.
* Bon Secours Richmond Health System, seemed to be ahead of the pack with six in leadership, two of which were women.
* Discovery Communications has 8 corporate managers, only one a woman.
* Ernst & Young’s Americas executive board has four men and no women, and of the eight service lines and practices leaders there were three women.
* General Mills, with its 11 top leaders has one woman.
* The McGraw-Hill Companies has 10 principal executives and no women.
* PricewaterhouseCoopers has 16 people in leadership positions, and only 1 woman.
* Deloitte was a tough one to crack. I couldn’t find a full list of its leaders on the website, only the CEO. OK, the company’s PR people just got back to me on the top seats. Of the 10 senior executives there is one woman.
I don’t want to disregard Working Mother’s list.
Much of what these firms claim to offer is necessary.
Across all industries, the Working Mother 100 Best Companies lead the way in pioneering programs that support families, with 100 percent offering flextime, on-site lactation rooms and telecommuting; and 98 percent offering job-sharing and wellness programs—numbers that dwarf those seen nationwide. In addition, financial programs available to the 100 Best employees are on the rise, a much needed boost for families in today’s economy. These include tuition reimbursement, retirement planning and pre-tax FSAs for childcare.
It’s great that companies say they offer flexibility and family-friendly policies, but what women need is the top jobs if they’re really going to change corporate America.
That, unfortunately, hasn’t happened yet on a wide scale.
Lists honoring “best” companies that help cut down on stress for working moms are not worth a lot if they don’t include evidence that indeed working moms are really making the big decisions and the big bucks.
September 23rd, 2009 at 10:12 am
I don’t agree with your headline; lactation rooms are really important.
But I completely agree with your post. Completely. These top employer lists frequently miss the forest for the trees, and this is a particularly clear example of that.
September 23rd, 2009 at 3:20 pm
My concern is that we women get all wrapped up in small things like a lactation room — which is just, after all, a room with a lock — and we don’t push for the big things, like having a voice in the boardroom.
September 23rd, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Eve, if there are women out there who have the resumes to match those of others (men) appointed to senior offices (and I’m sure they are out there), why have we not seen any significant workplace discrimination lawsuits regarding access to those positions? Are the women in such positions simply waiting for the gentrified leadership to retire or die, or they holding back because they realize that such a power struggle would be a very public spectacle and something bad for the company?
Have you ever interviewed any women who really should be at the top (but aren’t) based on their resumes? I’m curious to find out what they think on the topic.
September 24th, 2009 at 8:36 am
Thanks for that post. FYI: I found you through Career Builder.
Just a few thoughts: HikingStick, you are missing the most obvious obstacle. Woman are not judged solely on their skills. There are woman all around you that outperform managers two levels above them on the org chart. I personally know several of them. Discrimination can be in your face and also very apparent just under the surface. Your comments reveal your position that it is only a matter of competency.
September 24th, 2009 at 9:06 am
One more thought… I believe that the progress of equality is actually achieved by small incremental changes over time. Not that I believe that it is right but that it has been the most effective. Fifty one percent of the time confronting any bias head on appears to simply reinforce the very bias you are attempting to change.
In my opinion this is all about educating people about things they are actually incapable of seeing clearly. Yelling that they are wrong (even with powerfully supporting facts) only makes them disregard your comments even more. This movement is about dividing and concurring: one man at a time. This is an entire cultural shift. This is changing people’s core belief systems. They really believe they are right and nothing is wrong with the way they see the world. Our frustration is that it is so obvious but they do not see this. Focus on the low hanging fruit and work your way up.
I witnessed a friend open his mind to his bias and misunderstandings. It was extremely powerful. However, it took several incremental cracks in his logic for that to happen. He was totally committed to his beliefs. But was excited to share “his” realizations with me. I didn’t think he was a bad person just someone who really didn’t see the bigger picture. Now that is not to say that there are not extreme examples of people who show multiple errors in judgment and act out on them.
We all learn in different ways and at different times in our lives.
September 24th, 2009 at 9:32 am
No, Michael, I believe what you are saying is true. The reason why I focused on the resume is because that is supposed to be where we see all of the key qualifications of a person. Since there are women who are qualified, and obviously not enjoying positions that should match their qualifications, I was wondering why this has not been the topic of many individual action suits. I’ve heard of plenty of class action suits that claim companies discriminate against women by keeping them from management or other positions. I’m just wondering why we don’t hear of more cases where women are willing to fight the slight.
September 25th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
I write books on leadership, ethics, teamwork, motivation and women in the workforce.The statistics are basically true but disappointing, because women can contribute far more to the corporate world, if given a fair chance.
Some of my books on leadership and ethics trace the developement of women in the workforce and the role of male ego, which contributes to denying many women a fair chance in the corporate world. Despite this, many men consider themselves to be ethical leaders. My question: is “ethical leadership” an oxymoron?
September 27th, 2009 at 2:59 pm
What I have found is that the flexible schedules et al. are nice to have, but not really that relevant to those seeking a leadership role. When I returned to work roughly 2 years ago, I had a reduced hour schedule (34 hours) and worked at home two days a week. At the same time, I was promoted to a VP level and I thought I was working for the greatest company ever. Following a re-org earlier this year, I was basically told that my role is not “part time ” and that I was required me to be in the office full time as well as available after hours. There are three executive females in the company - two of whom are not married and have no kids and the third who has a stay at home husband. Not a lot in the way of role models that I can relate to - I am married with a toddler and two teenage step kids and a husband who is the primary breadwinner. Very disappointing.
As a note to the Working Mother article, I once worked for E&Y and while there attended a Women’s Forum meant to inspire women to become partners. Of the four female partners on the panel - again, one was never married, no kids; a second divorced, no kids; one married, no kids; and the fourth with a stay at home husband. Very inspiring, I must say.
October 2nd, 2009 at 3:47 am
Ethical leadership is not an oxymoron.
Standards that dictate equality in America, especially today, indicate that if you are an American, there exist no incrementation for your equality. The argument that transcends every obstruction is success and failure. That may sound like I am in some sort of surreal world no other poster here is in. And yet, if you are so inclined, only your clients determine the bottom line.
As much as many of you will argue this, it is my belief that no matter what moral compass you aspire to, and no matter what gender you are, it is correct to use absolutely any resolve to acquire your bottom line.
Male ego and female ego, in my experience is only an issue if you’d rather be mammals and do what they do on the discovery channel. I know, another ridiculously immature statement. Then again, I will always assist the corporate entity achieve success based on the very best presentation of your American status.
Now comes the really immature statement.
I will do so to make my children’s future a far, far better, lucrative, and solid nation full of alacrity.