Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

June-06-13

Gender is Obstacle for Female Corporate Board Members

According to a new study released by the Harvard Business Review, women who are members of corporate boards face significant barriers in their positions because of their gender.

The study, based off of a 2010 survey of almost 300 women and 100 men, sought to determine why there are so few women on the boards of Fortune 500 companies. Women only held 16.6% of board seats of Fortune 500 companies in the United States in 2012, a number that has remained relatively consistent in the past six years. Worldwide, women only made up 10% of corporate board members.

In their research, Harvard Business Review discovered that often women had to be more qualified than men in order to be appointed to a board. On average, 68% of women directors were in lead roles such as President or CEO compared to 51% of men directors. 77% of women directors held an operational role compared to 69% of men directors, despite operational experience being listed as a top quality by both women and men in the survey. "These findings suggest that to receive invitations to boards, women might need to be more accomplished than men," the researchers said.

In addition, researchers found that women faced gender bias from fellow board members when they were finally appointed. Despite half of the male survey participants saying that female board members did not face any additional obstacles because of their gender, 86% of female respondents felt they have to overcome gender barriers in their position. Researchers found that the barriers reported fell into one of four categories: not being heard or listened to, not being accepted as an equal, establishing credibility, and stereotypes of women's expected behavior. In the survey, researchers highlighted responses such as "I have to yell for them to hear me" and "I have to establish my credentials over and over; it never stops." They also included an anecdote from one female respondent who has been repeated pulled aside by the CEO and other board members and told she needed to be "less vocal." This even occurred during meetings, with one director interrupting her questions and exclaiming, "You're behaving just like my daughter! You're arguing too much-just stop!"

Media Resources: ThinkProgress 6/4/2013; Harvard Business Review June 2013


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

8/31/2015 Afghan Women Awarded for Women's Rights Advocacy - Ten Afghan women activists were awarded a prestigious prize and honor last week for their courageous fight for women's rights. . . .
 
8/31/2015 Chicago Activists Continue Hunger Strike to Save Predominately Black Public High School - Chicago residents have entered the second week of their hunger strike protesting the closure of Dyett High School, in the predominately African-American Bronzeville neighborhood located on the South Side of Chicago. Parents and community members are calling on the Chicago Board of Education to keep Dyett - the only open-enrollment, neighborhood school in its area - open and accept a community plan to revitalize the school with a focus on science and green technology. . . .
 
8/28/2015 Alaska Court Protects Abortion Access for Low-Income Women - The Alaska Superior Court struck down a state law yesterday that would have severely limited abortion access for low-income women in Alaska. The state's Superior Court also struck down a Department of Health and Social Services regulation that placed narrow specifications on Medicaid coverage for abortions, requiring that Medicaid-funded abortions be determined by a physician to be "medically necessary." Last year, the Center for Reproductive Rights, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Planned Parenthood sued on behalf of the Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest, claiming that the narrow definition of "medically necessary" arbitrarily established conditions designed to restrict the ability of low-income women to access abortion services. The law was temporarily blocked last July by an Alaskan state court judge. Superior Court Judge John Suddock ordered yesterday that the state be blocked from implementing this regulation, ruling that it placed an undue burden on low-income women seeking abortion services in Alaska. "By providing health care to all poor Alaskans except women who need abortions, the challenged regulation violates the state constitutional guarantee of 'equal rights, opportunities, and protection under the law'," the ruling read. "We applaud the superior court for striing down these cruel restrictions on women's health and rights that violate the Alaska Constitution," said Chris Charbonneau, CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands. . . .