female presence in boardrooms: review of global scenario in the … · 2. gender diversity in...

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH Online Open Access publishing platform for Management Research

© Copyright by the authors - Licensee IPA- Under Creative Commons license 3.0

Research Article ISSN 2229 – 3795

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 45

Volume 3 Issue 1, 2012

Female presence in boardrooms: Review of global scenario in the context of

legislative reforms in corporate governance Soumi Rai

Assistant Professor (OB & HR), Symbiosis Institute of International Business,

Symbiosis International University,

G.ni. 174/1, Rajiv Gandhi Infotech Park, MIDC, Hinjewadi, Pune – 411057,

Maharashtra, India

[email protected]

ABSTRACT

This paper focuses on understanding the various legislations initiated by countries across the

globe towards empowering women with representation on Company Management Boards

and restoring their gender rights in a male dominated business arena through Corporate

Quotas. The aim is to understand whether the ‘Legislative representation’ really has had any

impact on Company boards across these few countries through a review of preliminary

studies conducted in this domain. The paper represents a comparative study across developed

nations (viz. European countries, US, Canada) and some developing nations to understand

where they stand in the current perspective related to women representation on Corporate

Boards. This has been further extended in the context of the Asia-Pacific region to depict

where the concerned nations stand in the sphere related to women equality and empowerment,

while proposing empirical research in this region, to understand factors that attribute towards

lower presence of women on corporate boards (WOCB).

Keywords: Asia, Board, Corporate, Gender, Governance, Legislations, Quotas, Women,

WOCB

1. Introduction

The global scenario both socially and economically, has undergone a radical change process

over the century, with gradual progress and development of women not only across the

developed nations but also their lesser cousins – the developing nations (ILO Women in

Labour Markets 2011). Women empowerment is the buzz today with not only educated

women taking stride, but rural women following suite with access to information and

education. Supplemented by enhanced health benefits, economic liberty and moderate reform

policies; women across the world are gradually realizing their potential to score above men

and reclaim their rightful status in the society. There has been a growing interest in

understanding perspectives related to potential of women managers and their contribution to

business across the globe. Researchers have traditionally focused on understanding the

qualities of women managers, their contribution to business, having further delved on

attributes and capabilities of the ‘pink brigade’ through the eyes of the dominant sex (their

male counterparts) (see for example Norburn 1989, Srinivas et al 1999, Budhwar et al 2005,

Hodson and Sullivan 2008). Needless to say a plethora of research work over the last decade

has actually focused on understanding the level of women participation in management

Female presence in boardrooms: Review of global scenario in the context of legislative reforms in corporate

governance

Soumi Rai

ASIAN JOURNAL OF MANAGEMENT RESEARCH


46

boards of companies across the world (see for example Burke 1997, Charan 1998, Flynn and

Adams 2004, Billimoria 2000a, Singh and Vinicombe 2001, 2005, Terejesan and Singh 2008,

2009) given the heightened interest in women empowerment, equality and gender diversity.

Policy makers, management gurus, business honchos alike keep scrambling over each other

in a bid to portray their ‘Equity stand’, that is their belief in equality for all sexes; especially

the ‘fairer sex’. Come International Women’s Day, and across the world host of conferences,

events, gatherings vie for attention from Women Leaders, entrepreneurs and their socialist

counterparts to honor and felicitate them on this very ‘SPECIAL’ occasion. Magazines,

newspapers and television channels go overboard portraying glossy pictures and clips of

smiling women leaders accepting honors and accolades. But is ‘women empowerment’ or

‘equity’ for women contained in that one very special day of 8th

March? This is a question

that till today remains unanswered; reason the gross figures and research reports that over the

years have diligently tracked the growth of women managers on corporate boards across the

globe – highlighting a not so rosy picture as seemingly expected through the tinted glasses of

the business domain.

1.1 Women participation in workforce – trends

The participation of women in workforce has ever been traditionally limited to spheres like

teaching, nursing and administration which required less strenuous activities and allowed

women the dual option of being both a supplementary income source and a care giver while

retaining her primary domestic responsibilities. Societal pressures and gender stereotyping

over the centuries ensured that women were limited to jobs that allowed them more flexibility

but less monetary benefits, with an assumption that women either did not have the

capabilities to perform other jobs in male dominated spheres or simply did not possess

interest in them. (Hodson and Sullivan 2008)

A study by the ILO Bureau of statistics for ‘Economically active population from 1950-

2010’, highlights that economically active women in the workforce during 1950 were merely

32.4 percent in the age group 15-64 years, forecasting an increase to about 41.2 percent by

2010 with major increase happening in the developed nations and mainly across the

agricultural and services segment than manufacturing segment. The ILO report on Global

employment trends for Women 2009, details that there has been an increase in women

participation in the labour force from 52.4 percent in 1998 to around 52.6 percent in 2008,

increasing slightly to 52.7% by year 20091. ILO research depicts share of women in

workforce going up to 40.5% in 2008 from 39.9 % in 1998. It further portrays an average

increase of female employment ratio by 1.2% for Adult employment-to-population ratio

across nations, with significant increase happening in Latin America (almost 8.4%); the only

exception being South East Asia and the Pacific decreasing by 1.1%. The ILO Global

Employment Trends report 2011 details an overall increase in Female employment-to-

population ratio across the world from 48.2% in 2000, to 49.2% in 2006 with a slight increase

in 2010 to 49.4%.2

What then has changed over the past decades that have ushered in this radical change across

the globe? The fact that women are looking up and being ambitious is obviously just the

periphery factor, strong determination to usher in change both for themselves and the society

1 Source: ILO Global Employment Trends 2011, Table A9

2 Source: ILO Global Employment Trends 2011, Table A5


governance

Soumi Rai



47

at large, marking their individuality and creating a space of their own in a world

predominantly inhibited by men is fuelling them on.

The western world comprising developed nations has always been leading us in terms of

women empowerment in professional domains. Today the US has almost 51% representation

of women in the workforce; Europe leads the chart with Denmark having almost 75%

representation of women in the workforce and Sweden a close second at 70%. 3 The Eurostat

2009 Labour force survey detailed a continuous increase in women employment rate from

53.6% in 2000 to 59.1% in 2008, amongst member nations.

Source: EUROSTAT 2009

Given these impressive statistics, it is only natural to feel elated about increasing participation

of women in the workforce. However on a closer look, the same reports reveal that these

statistics are a combined outlook for women working across both developed and developing

nations in all sectors (namely agricultural, manufacturing, services and allied sector). Only a

small portion of women are working in the manufacturing sector (18.3% in 2008), with the

majority working in the service sector (46.3% in 2008) and the agricultural sector. The data

also highlights that while agricultural sector comprises a miniscule part of women

employment across Developed countries and the European Union, it accounts for almost 60%

women employment in Sub Saharan regions and South Asia. Another recent report by ILO4

on women participation and gender disparity highlights that although there has been an

increase in employability of women, around one-fourth of them still are unpaid contributing

family workers with no direct pay for their efforts. Even the miniscule percent that are part of

the employed population work in low paying jobs, slogging long hours with informal work

arrangements. There is huge disparity in pay across sectors with male counterparts getting

paid much higher than their female counterparts. Glaring differences existing even across

developed nations on pay disparity amongst the genders highlight discrimination for women

in workforce at all levels. Interestingly while women employment-to-population ratio has

3 Source: Eurostat

4 ILO-Women in Labour Markets, Measuring progress and identifying challenges, March 2010, Pg 3, 12, Table

2D


governance

Soumi Rai



48

shown steady increase from 1999 to 2009 across seven of nine world regions, there has been

a decrease in this percent across the regions of East Asia and South-East Asia & the Pacific.

Thus it is not hard to understand why women find increased representation across boards in

Developed nations and the European Union but have limited or no representation across

African and Asian nations.

2. Gender diversity in boardrooms and related challenges

Research in the domain of Corporate Governance suggests that boardroom diversity is the

need of the hour for overall improved business performance. Notably so this has been an area

of concern with more homogeneity than heterogeneity in the composition of Corporate

Boards. Researchers believe that diversity, be it in terms of ethnicity, demography or gender

related representation bring more variety in terms of experience and opinions in the board

reducing perception bias and myopic viewpoints towards decision making. While researchers

like Charan (1998), Westphal and Zajac (1995) focused on boardroom diversity as an area for

Corporate Governance related reforms, others like Noburn (1989) and Singh, Vinicombe and

Johnson (2001) focused on understanding the meaning of diversity across UK boards.

Norburn (1989) through his research of UK boards found that board members were drawn

from known networks thus increasing board homogeneity, reducing conflicts and allowing

the CEO to take tactical decisions based on personal goals rather than overall shareholder

interest. Researchers point out that this lack of positive conflicts and diverse viewpoints may

not necessarily heighten business performance, conversely such boardroom homogeneity can

have negative implications for business.

Charan (1998) believed that this stagnation in boardrooms needs to be challenged through

major corporate reforms in terms of board member appointments from diverse groups

increasing board heterogeneity. Similar view was echoed by Billimoria (2000a) through his

research that found overall financial profitability was higher in 50 of the Fortune 500 listed

companies that had women directors on board. He felt that this could either be a result of

boardroom gender diversity or could on the other side be related to the open mindset of

profitable companies that accepted women representation in their boards. Another interesting

fact highlighted by Billimoria (2000a) detailed women being appointed as additional

directors rather than replacement for existing directors on company boards. He linked this to

the fact that visible presence of women directors on boards enhanced corporate reputation

and image as equal opportunity employer, which can lead to higher investments by large fund

house thus being a motivating reason for increased gender diversity across profitable

companies.

Taking this further Singh et al (2001) reviewed considerable research done across the world

detailing women representation on Corporate Boards while conducting their survey on top

UK organizations. They found that there is indeed quite a low representation of women

directors even in a developed nation like United Kingdom, wherein male CEO’s feel that

women at such senior levels lack boardroom experience and maturity. Perceptual male bias

towards their abilities to undertake critical international assignments, challenging tasks and

hardship profiles have been cited as some of the reasons hampering movement of women

across corporate boardrooms.

Culture specific attitude towards women managers and its related discriminations also feature

as one of the prominent reasons impacting boardroom gender diversity. Srinivas et al(1999)

through a cross-cultural attitude study across four countries found favorable attitude towards


governance

Soumi Rai



49

women managers in developed nations like US but a more negative approach in developing

nations like India and Mexico with Japanese male managers clearly hinting at their reluctance

to work under female bosses preferring to keep gender roles separate. This attitudinal bias is

clearly reflected through a survey by Terjesan and Singh (2008) that depicts Japan with a

mere 2% representation of women in corporate board with highest representation by Slovenia

(European Union) at almost 23%.

Despite perceptual and attitudinal issues, research conducted across companies with women

directors on board has divulged the positive impact of female power on firm performance and

governance sustainability. To better understand how gender diversity impacts corporate

governance in turn impacting firm performance, Terjesan et al (2009) conducted an in-depth

review and research on women representation across Corporate Boards. Their study found

that boards with women representation are more formal and structured with a clear focus on

company strategy, implementation and measurement. There is more transparency in board

governance practices with reduced bias in board member selection process through use of

professional sources increasing overall heterogeneity in the composition of boards,

encouraging diverse views and opinions. The paper interestingly notes that in presence of

female board members, male counterparts behave in a more civilized manner moderating

their masculinity leading to better task management, performance and efficient governance.

Their comprehensive research combining review of 400 published research papers on WOCB,

highlight unique attributes of female directors relating to their experience, knowledge, skills

and ‘feminine intuition’ that help in strategic decision making with a more open mindset

balancing practical task attributes with detailed analysis.

3. Women representation on corporate boards – global excerpts

There is a plethora of research that has been conducted in the last decade detailing women

participation as directors on Corporate/Company Boards. However most of the researchers

have used different parameters for tracking this data, some considering only full-time

executive director positions across Fortune 500 companies while others have included non-

executive director positions along with a consideration for smaller companies with family

members (female members) acting as representatives on company boards. It thus becomes

difficult to accurately state the percentage of exact representation by women on corporate

boards in a global context, all the same an attempt has been made to collate available research

reports and depict some interesting facts relating to representation of the ‘fair sex’ in

company boardrooms.

3.1 Canada

Study by Burke (1997) across Canadian public and private sector organizations5 found than

less 5% women act as directors on board of Canadian private sector companies, with an

average of 3.5 board service by women across sectors. Most of these women were full-time

directors (57%) while others functioned as directors of own businesses (13%) or as

Consultants (7%). It was also found that one-third of the sample size (278 women directors

had professional qualifications and experience with almost half (48%) having general

management expertise. This has significantly changed over the years with women labour

force participation going up from 45.4% in 1997 to 47.3% in 20106. Catalyst survey of

5 Sample size of 278 Female directors from the Directory of Directors by Financial Times

6 Catalyst survey 2011: Women in Management in Canada


governance

Soumi Rai



50

Canadian Financial Post 500 firms portrays a 5% increase in senior management positions

held by women from 12.0% in 1999 to 17.7% in 2010. Even the percentage of women in

senior management occupation has shown significant rise from 25.2% in 1995 to 31.2 % by

2010. Despite this visible growth of women in senior management positions, their share as

women directors on Canadian boards stands at an average of 14%7, way less than their

European counterparts.

3.2 The United States

Flynn and Adams (2004) in their compiled study on data related to both Fortune 500

companies and Fortune 501-1000 companies present an interesting picture relating to women

in US boards. As on 2003, percentage of women holding board seats in United States Fortune

500 companies stood at 13.6% with about 10.8% companies having no women holding board

seats. Breaking down this data statistically, the researchers found that of the 100 largest

public sector companies in Massachusetts, only 9% had women directors on board while over

50% had no women directors at all. The situation did not brighten with Chicago’s 50 largest

companies having 12.4% women holding board seats and 10% having no women directors. In

Philadelphia’s 120 largest companies surveyed, 11.5% had women directors on board while

around 34.2% had no women in the boardroom. Again Georgia’s 175 public companies had

just 7.1% board seats held by women with 54.3% companies having no women directors.

Thus on an average the participation of women on corporate boards across U.S. Fortune 500

companies ranges from 10-12%. Interestingly the data reveals that while percentage of

women directors are higher in Fortune 500 companies (with most having one or two directors

on board), the numbers drastically drop for companies in Fortune 501-1000, citing instance of

Chicago with only 8.4% representation of women on board and Philadelphia with a mere

9.2% in the same category. There seems to have been little progress in these figures even

after 6 years, with the Catalyst Census on U.S. Fortune 500 companies 2010 depicting a

growth of just 2% from 13.6% ( in 2003) to 15.7% (in 2010) for women holding board seats.

The survey data also categorized boards with one or more women directors and found that

while over 50% companies had at least 2 women directors, a significant 10% had no women

in their boardroom, a situation that definitely needs improvement.

3.3 The European nations

According to the European Union Labour Survey Report (2009), the employment rate for

women in the age category of 15-64 years, across these EU27 countries steadily increased

from 53.7% in 2000 to around 59.1% by 2008 with the first ever drop happening in 2009 to

58.6%. This has further reduced to around 58.2% by year 2010 as per the latest European

Union Labour Survey Report 2010.8 A glance at these statistics could signify that the

situation of women participation in employment across the European Union is similar to that

existing across other nations of the world with women having reducing employment rates

versus their male counterparts. A closer look however portrays an altogether different picture,

because women empowerment and participation has been steadily rising in these countries

(specifically the Scandinavian nations) owing to governmental support and dictum.9 The

fourth bi-annual European Board Women Monitor Report 2010, details that there has been a

consistent increase in the proportion of women in Europe’s top companies (around 300 as per

7 Catalyst Fortune 500: 2010 Census

8 See Eurostat Report 2009 and 2010 – European Union Labour Force Survey.

9 Refer Pg 15-22 relating to detailed discussion on impact of Legislations in the European cotries.


governance

Soumi Rai



51

survey) up to 12% in 2010 from just 8% in 2004. Almost 80% companies surveyed across

these nations have at least one women director on board. Figures are highly positive for

Scandinavian countries (Norway, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands and Denmark) which lead

the survey results, with a dismal show by countries like Italy and Portugal having just 3.9%

and 3.4% representation respectively. The European Board Diversity Analysis 2010, by Egon

Zehnder International looked at a sample size of 340 companies across 17 European countries

with a market capitalization over EURO 4 billion; their study found similar statistics of

average 12.2% representation by women on these corporate boards. While Scandinavian

nations tend to lead the representation figures with 1 in 3 board directors being women

(Norway -31.9%, Finland – 28.8% and Sweden – 28.7%), it is heartening to note that eight

countries have broken the 10% barrier (Austria, Belgium, France, Denmark, the Netherlands,

Republic of Ireland and the UK). France has shown a significant rise with representation by

women increasing by a significant 4.8% to 12.4% in 2010, which only goes and reconfirms

its stand on increasing women diversity on corporate boards. However as earlier discussed

even amongst the European nations, countries like Greece, Italy and Luxembourg still have

over 50% companies with no women directors on board.

Source: European Board Diversity Analysis 2010, Egon Zehnder International

3.4 The United Kingdom

The Cranfield School of Management has been undertaking continued research over the past

decade to understand increasing participation of women in the corporate boardrooms,

specifically in the context of FTSE 100 companies (Financial Times/London Stock

Exchange). Supported by the UK department of Equalities, this continuing research work

covers a plethora of data and findings pertaining to women participation in workforce and

subsequent rise as members of the board. In one of the earliest research papers (Singh et al

2001), the emphasis is on detailing how diverse representation in boards through women

members, can increase or impact firm performance positively. The researchers analyzed that

while 64% of FTSE 100 companies had at least one female director in 1999, the percentage

dropped to 58% by 2000; comparatively the percentage of companies with no female


governance

Soumi Rai



52

directors went up from 36% in 1999 to 42% in 2000.10

The percentage seems to have further

declined to 57% in 2001, before improving and moving from 68% in 2003 to 78% in 2005.

However in terms of female executive directors the figures are significant, the data moves

from 10% companies having female executive directors in 2000 to only 8% in 2001, moving

up gradually to 13% in 2003 and dipping back below even 2002 limits (12%) to only 11%

companies with female executive directors by 2005.11

The Female FTSE 100 Report 2010

(Vinicombe et al, 2010) does not reflect a heartening picture either, with a steady plateau in

terms of FTSE 100 companies with at least one female director. The percentage for this data

moves from 78% in 2008, to a mild dip of 75% in 2009; going back to up to 79% again in

2010. The percentage of women directors on board has remained steady at 12.5% in 2010,

with a slight increment over 2008 (11.7%) but a significant rise from 2000 (5.8%).Though

the portrayal seems stagnating, there has been some increase in female executive directorship,

around 18% by 2010 across FTSE 100 companies.12

Researchers through this study further

analyzed FTSE 250 companies, reporting almost 52.4% such companies having no female

directors on board and just 7.8% companies having women board directors.

3.5 Asia and the Pacific

Asian companies lag behind their European, American and even their Australian counterparts

in equality and gender diversity parameters. Study by Korn/Ferry International in 100 largest

companies across emerging Asia-Pacifica economies13

show dismal figures below 10%

representation by women on boards of these companies.

Source: Korn/Ferry International Asian Board Diversity 2011

Hong Kong has 8.6%, China 8.1%, Malaysia 7.8% women as company directors with the

figures going low to 6.1% at Singapore and 4.7% only in India. Australia leads in the regional

10

See Singh et al 2001, Pg 209 11

See Singh et al, (2005), Female FTSE100 report 2005, Pg 4 12

See Female FTSE Report 2010, Pg 8 and Female FTSE100 report 2005, Pg 4 13

Comprising of Australia, China, Hong Kong, India, Malaysia, New Zealand and Singapore


governance

Soumi Rai



53

study with 44% boards representing at least one female director with China standing next at

39%, and New Zealand lower down the bar at just 23%. Surprisingly over 70% companies in

these six countries had no women independent directors, while boards with three or more

women directors were a rarity. The study also found that 348 of 700 boards in these countries

had only male directors with only 22 boards having more than two directors in either

executive or non-executive independent director roles. Leadership positions were virtually

absent in Asian and Pacifica companies, with New Zealand having no female CEO’s, Hong

Kong and India having just 2%, Australia 3% and Singapore 5% female CEO’s. Statistically

China scored in this category with 7% female CEO’s14

.

Comparative data for countries in the Asia-Pacific region shows quite a difference in the

Catalyst Survey 2010, wherein smaller developing countries like Philippines and Thailand

have 19.2% and 10.4% women on corporate boards respectively, while their developed

counterparts like Japan and South Korea have just 0.9% and 1.5% representation in that order.

Source: Catalyst Survey 2010: Women on Boards

Interestingly, the GMI15

Survey 2010 depicts Philippines scoring highest in the category

related to companies having at least one female director on company board, a round figure of

100% with Thailand following close behind at 72.73%. These comparative figures with wide

variations amongst developed and developing economies in the Asia-Pacific region, portray

the participation levels of women in workforce which to an extent may be culture specific

tuned to traditional mindsets of the concerned countries where women empowerment in work

domain figures lowest on priority.

3.5 a. Australia and New Zealand

The Australian Bureau of Statistics in their latest statistics on Labour Force survey 201116

,

detail the increasing trends in women participation in the workforce from the year 1978,

14

Companies in China have presidents than CEO’s. 15

Governance Metric International Survey 2010 16

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/DetailsPage/6202.0Oct%202011?OpenDocument


governance

Soumi Rai



54

wherein the employment-to-population ratio for females has increased from 39.5% in Feb

1978 to 56.1 % in Oct 2011, while the overall employment considering both full-time and

part-time workers in thousands has swelled from 2098.3 in 1978 to 5246.4 in the year 2011.

Despite these impressive statistical numbers of female employment in the country, EOWA

Australian Census of women in Leadership 2010 depicts the stagnant growth of Australian

women in the boardrooms across ASX 200 companies, which shows a mere increase of 0.2%

over 2004 figures from 8.2% to about 8.4% in 2010. GMI17

data on the other side shows a

declining trend in the average percentage of women on Australian boards going down from

10.53% in 2009 to only 8.28% in 2010. In a bid to address the growing concern for

continued decline of women at senior management levels, the Australian government has

issued recommendations under the ASX Corporate Governance Council Corporate

Governance Principles and Recommendations in 2010; for public listed companies to adopt

and publicly disclose a diversity policy that gives a clear picture of women representation on

boards and also measure objectively progress in attaining this diversity. However since these

are recommendations and not mandatory policies; their adoption and subsequent impact

remains debatable.

3.5 b. India

According to the Registrar General of India, the proportion of women in the workforce in

1981 was 19.7 percent and it rose to 22.7 percent in 1991, further rising to 25.7 percent in

2001. However the figures again dipped to an average of almost 19% by the year 2004.18

The Economic Survey 2007 – 2008 also conveys some interesting facts in terms of women

participation in the workforce in the organized sector. As compared to the private sector

which has 20.95 lakhs women against 63.57 lakhs men, the Public sector has a dismal 29.21

lakhs women against 150.86 lakhs men in the workforce.

While prevalent data suggests that women have almost one-third participation in the

workforce, their representation reduces statistically at the ascending stages of the corporate

ladder, specifically at the senior management positions. GMI19

data on India depicting

average percentage of women on boards show a slight increase of 0.58% from 2009 (4.21%)

to 2010 (4.79%).

The Cranfield School of Management in association with Community Business conducted an

extensive survey on BSE-10020

listed companies in India, covering a total of 1,124

directorships to understand the status of women representation in corporate boardrooms

across these top listed Indian companies. This was further followed by interview data

collection for 18 senior women leaders to understand their perspectives towards women

participation in Indian boards. The survey found that of the total 1,124 directorship in the

BSE-100 listed companies (comprising 26 industry classifications)21

, only 59 directorships

(just about 5.3%) and 8 executive directorships (around 2.5%) out of 323 total executive

directorship positions, were held by women. In terms of companies, the survey portrays 54

companies having no female directors on board (54%) with 46 companies having at least one

17

Governance Metric International Survey 2010 18

Nasscom 19

Governance Metrics International Survey 2010 20

BSE-100: Bombay Stock Exchange 100 public listed companies 21

Refer Standard Chartered Bank: Women on Corporate Boards in India 2010, Pg 17-20


governance

Soumi Rai



55

female director and only 12 companies with multiple female directors (more than one). These

findings reflect pathetic situation of women in leadership roles in a country like India where

women literacy levels have been steadily growing (Census Survey 2011 recorded women

literacy rate at 65.46%, up by 11.79% as against the male literacy rate at 82.14%, going up

only by 6.88%)22

.

4. Legislations for women representation on board

In December 2003 the Norwegian Parliament amended the Public Limited Companies Act to

give public limited companies five years to either ensure that women held 40 per cent of the

seats of each listed company listed or risk closure. The requirement came into effect on

January 1, 2008, and the government further began considering extending the law to cover

family-owned companies as well. The legislation attracted extensive and vociferous criticism

from business, much like children throwing tantrums when forced to do something they don't

want to do.

Statistics Norway revealed that by February 19, 2008, 39 per cent of the board representatives

in public limited companies were women. 93 per cent of the 459 public limited companies

had met the requirements of representation of both sexes laid down in the Public Limited

Companies Act. 23

France has been debating a legislation since 2010 and has recently (mid-January 2011)

approved passing of a legislation mandating 40% representation of women on board of

companies listed on the French stock exchange (CAC 40) by 201624

. Currently France has

just 15% representation on board of CAC 40 listed companies, however if this legislation gets

passed then the numbers will swell to almost 40% in an estimated time frame of 6 years

(Based on growth evidence and impact of Norway quota legislation)25

.

Despite such strong representation by women on Corporate Boards across European nations,

countries like Sweden still do not have any formal legislation for women representation on

board. They currently have policies under corporate governance striving towards gender

equality in boardrooms. However now the Swedish government is proposing that companies

listed on the Stockholm Stock Exchange should ensure that they have 40 per cent of women

on their main boards by 2010 else face fines until the representation is achieved.

According to Elin Hurvenes, Founder of the Professional Boards Forum – “Sweden has a

strong line of women investors, both heiresses and women wealthy in their own right, who

serve on the boards of companies they invest in and that helps. The Swedes currently have

about 23% women on their boards, which is well above the European average” 26

The Spanish Parliament too has taken forward steps in ensuring women representation on

Company boards. Through a recent legislation, the government has called for 40 per cent

board participation by 2015 for women. Belgium too is considering quota legislation since

2009 which proposes that company boards should have at least one third directors as women.

22

http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/data_files/india/Table-2(3)_literacy.pdf 23

http://back2003.en.epochtimes.com/news/8-7-7/73015.html 24

Women in Corporate Boardrooms: A global perspective, Deloitte Consulting Report 2011, Pg 9 25

Refer discussions 26

http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/14/norway-french-legislation-equality-forbes-woman-leadership-executive-

boards.html


governance

Soumi Rai



56

A strong debate on this issue has been storming the Belgian parliament; however the passing

of legislation in this context is still pending.

On the other side of the globe while both United States and Canada do not have any

mandatory legislations towards enhancing women representation on company boards, both

these countries have norms under Corporate Governance that encourage and strive towards

diversity in boardrooms for listed and regulated companies, keeping a tab on the participation

levels of women in the workforce and at senior management positions. Similarly countries

like Australia, under its ASX (Australian Stock Exchange) Corporate Governance Council

Corporate Governance Principles and Regulations; have issued new recommendations in

2010 aimed at increasing boardroom diversity through enhanced participation of women

employees specifically at senior management levels.27

The Indian government too has taken some steps in enhancing women representation in the

legislative sphere by passing the Women’s Reservation Bill in the upper House (Rajya

Sabha) mandating 33% reservation for women in gram panchayats (village councils), state

assemblies and the parliament in 2010, which has been applauded as a historic step towards

women empowerment28

. However the intentions of the government remain sketchy in

relation to corporate quotas for women, with changes to be proposed in the Companies Bill

2009 mandating one board seat be reserved for women on boards comprising five or more

independent directors29

.

A report published by Catalyst 2010, summarizes the different legislations and corporate

governance norms across countries which have already implemented policies for mandatory

inclusion of women in corporate boards, while also giving an overview for countries that are

still debating implementation of such mandatory legislations/norms.

Implemented

Country

or Region

Date Type Details

Australia July 2010 Regulation

(Disclosure)

Companies must legally operate under an “if

not, why not” mandate. Companies must

reveal the achievement against board-

established gender objectives; the number of

women employees in the entire organization,

in senior management, and on the board; and

companies are encouraged to review gender

diversity of the board and organization

Finland 2010

Regulation

(Corporate

Governance

Code)

In effect January 1, 2010. Public companies

need to have both genders represented on the

board of directors (typically regarded as at

least one woman). If not, companies must

explain the reason why.

In 2004, the Finnish government instituted a

27

Women in Corporate Boardrooms: A global perspective, Deloitte Consulting Report 2011, Pg 6-17 28

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-03-09/india/28137030_1_unruly-scenes-women-s-

reservation-bill-constitution-amendment-bill 29

http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/women-to-get-one-reserved-seatcompany-boards/427860/


governance

Soumi Rai



57

2004

Regulation

(Target)

program requiring that women constitute at

least 40 percent of board members in

companies that are wholly owned by the State.

The target was achieved in Spring 2006.

Iceland 2010 Legislation Publicly owned companies and public limited

companies with 50 or more employees must

have at least 40% of both genders by 2013.

Israel 1993 (gov’t

companies);

1999

(public

& private

companies)

Legislation The 1993 Amendment 6 of the Government

Companies Act (1975) states that for

companies in which the government owns at

least 51%, “appropriate expression will be

given to the representation of both sexes” and

that government ministers will appoint

directors from the underrepresented sex when

feasible. The 1999 Companies Act states that

if a board of directors is all one gender, then

when pointing one of two mandated outside

directors, the company shall appoint someone

from the other gender.

Norway 2003 Legislation Required 40% of directors on boards in

Norway to be women. State-owned

enterprises had until 2006 to comply, while

public companies had until 2008.

Quebec December

2006

Legislation The Quebec Parliament voted into law a

policy mandating the equal number of women

and men on the boards of directors of state

companies. Organizations have until

December 14, 2011 to comply

Spain 2007

May 2006

Legislation

Regulation

(Corporate

Governance

Code)

4 out of 10 seats must go to women, starting

in 2015.

Voluntary regulation adopted by the Comisión

Nacional del Mercado de Valores (CNMV).

Companies with no or few women directors

should explain why and the measures taken to

correct it. Specifically, the Nomination

Committee should take steps to ensure that the

process for filling board vacancies has no

implicit bias against women and that the

company makes a conscious effort to consider

women candidates for vacancies.

Sweden July 2008 Regulation

(Corporate

Governance

Code)

For all Swedish limited companies whose

shares are traded on regulated markets in

Sweden, the company is to strive for equal

gender distribution on the board.

United

Kingdom

2010 Regulation

(Corporate

Governance

Code)

When searching for and appointing directors,

companies must “pay due regard for the

benefits of diversity on the board, including

gender.”

United

States

February

2010

Regulation

(Disclosure)

There are no quotas, but public companies and

mutual funds must disclose in their proxy

statements whether or not diversity is a

consideration when directors are named. If


governance

Soumi Rai



58

these companies consider diversity during

appointment proceedings, the SEC requires

disclosure of how this policy is implemented,

and how the board (or nominating

committees) evaluates the effectiveness of this

diversity policy.

Source: CATALYST 2010

Proposed/in-process

Country or

Region

Date Type Details

Belgium 2006-2009 Legislation Corporate governance code effective; quota

legislation proposed in Parliament.

Senator Sabine De Béthune (CD&V) stated

last November [2009] that she wanted to

legislate on the quotas of women in

companies listed on the

stock exchange. Minister Joëlle Milquet

immediately came out in support of the idea,

and it is now being discussed.

Britain Legislation Britain is “considering state-mandated

quotas”.

Canada July 2010 Legislation The Senate is currently considering the

“Board of Directors Gender Parity Act,”

which would require certain corporations,

financial institutions, and parent Crown

corporations to have 50% women directors

(or for boards with an odd number of

members, the difference between women and

men directors equaling one)

European

Union

August

2010

Legislation Though nothing is currently formalized yet,

E.U. Fundamental Rights Commissioner

Viviane Reding has stated that unless

companies change their numbers, the

Commission will create legislation mandating

that women be 20% of board members

France June 2010 Legislation France is currently considering legislation

that would require 40% of corporate board

members to be women by 2016. The bill

passed the French National Assembly in

January 2010; Final vote required (expected

January 2011). The

authors of the proposed law are French

Deputies Jean-François Copé and Marie-Jo

Zimmermann.

Italy November

2009

Legislation Italy is currently considering legislation

(proposta di legge n. 2956) for publicly

traded companies, requiring at least one-third

of board seats to be held by women (i.e., the

least represented gender). Passed the House


governance

Soumi Rai



59

December 2010, still needs to pass in the

Senate.

Source: CATALYST 2010

4.1 Analysis

4.1.1 Do legislations/quotas make a difference?

While progress for women as managers, entrepreneurs and socialists have initiated a

comprehensive portfolio of research; there has been less focus on understanding the ground

realities pertaining to various reforms and legislatures enacted across the world towards

women equality and empowerment and their related impact towards increasing representation

of women in corporate boardrooms.

Pande and Ford (2011) in their background paper for the World Development Report in

Gender, highlight this very aspect of various legislations and quotas adopted by countries

worldwide, summarizing the positive impact of such policies on increasing participation level

of women in leadership positions in both political and business domains. The paper through

its analysis looks at various statistics related to increased participation of women in the

legislative voting process (increased from 96% countries in 1994, providing the right to vote

for women to 100% in 2006), increasing presence in legislative boards (around 19.4 %

legislators across the world are women30

with Nordic countries leading again at 42.3%) while

creating an overview of factors that act as potential barriers for success of women as leaders

either in political or corporate roles. The paper ends with an open question on the success of

political and corporate quotas towards enhancing presence of women in these domains which

lacks empirical evidence at this stage, being more causal than factual.

Wider perspective on analyzing the impact of legislations seems to eventually commence

with Norway; being the first country to have ever implemented mandatory legislations for

Corporate Quotas.31

The impact of Legislation has been tremendous in Norway. Initially the

representation of women on Norwegian Board was a mere 6% which has rapidly grown up to

almost 39.5% in 2009 as a result of women quota legislation. But the question that remains

open is whether organizations across Norway have adopted this legislation in the true sense32

,

or are they merely trying to fill up positions to avoid non-compliance and thereby company

dissolution by the Norwegian government. Matsa and Miller (2011), in their working paper

study on the Norwegian quota system and Scandinavian countries found empirical evidence

that operating profits declined for firms that adopted quotas in the short-term perspective due

to increase in wage cost and higher employment rates attributed to decisions by women

members on board, which seems to suggest that this system is not healthy in share-holder

interest. However they further also stress that in the long-term adopting female on board shall

be beneficial from the perspective of the working populace wherein female directors look

towards increasing short-term wage cost and offsetting its impact through long-term increase

in labour productivity. When looking at changes in demographics of talented women for

recruitment to boardrooms before implementation of quota legislations, the same study found

that no major differences existed in terms of education, experience and professional

30

http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/world.htm 31

Refer legislations for women on board 32

Meaning sincere interest in increasing boardroom diversity for informed and unbiased decision making


governance

Soumi Rai



60

backgrounds amongst women who were recruited to corporate boards’ pre-2009 to those who

were recruited post this time period.

Across Europe barring the rapid growth of Norway; representation of women on corporate

boards has been quite slow as revealed through data spanning from 2006 to 2010 by Catalyst

Census Survey. While most of the European nations have been deliberating implementation

of legislations and mandatory reforms in Corporate Governance norms, aimed at increasing

numbers for women in the boardrooms of publicly listed companies on their respective Stock

Exchanges; progress has been at snail pace. Most countries have either allocated timelines till

2016 for public companies to comply with women inclusiveness related diversity in

boardrooms or have issued recommendations for companies to state reasons for failing to

fulfill this criterion; results of which have been varied and sporadic.

Source: CATALYST SURVEY 2010: Women on Boards

The Fourth Bi-annual European PWN Board Women Monitor 2010 further portrays

Netherlands having taken over the lead position from the United Kingdom. With 15.8%,

almost double the percentage of 2006 (6.5%), this country clearly benefits from the many

private initiatives and press attention for the issue of women’s under representation on boards

in the past few years. The UK at 13.59% seems to have improved slightly after having

reached a standstill in 2008 (around 11.5%), with the percentage hardly moving since 2006

(11.4%) after an initial encouraging growth rate of 1.4 percentage points from 10% in 2004.

Growth in France has also fairly improved (11.95%) than it’s below average results in 2008

with 7.6% women on board and around 7.3% in 2006. Germany too has recorded an average

growth of women on boards, from 7.2% in 2006 to 7.8% in 2008, to just about 8.5% in

2010.33

Preliminary studies based on statistical data seems to suggest that this slight increase

in women representation can be attributable to heightened curiosity on enhancing Corporate

33

http://www.europeanpwn.net (Third Bi-annual European PWN Board Women Monitor 2008), (Fourth Bi-

annual European PWN Board Women Monitor 2010)


governance

Soumi Rai



61

diversity at senior management levels and also partly to ongoing debates and discussions for

WOCB in the legislative and governance spheres; however the actual picture shall only

emerge on focused and detailed empirical research of attributable variables.

4.2 Does gender disparity across regions impact women representation in boardrooms?

It is interesting to note that while statistical data on global level depict an increased

representation of women in the workforce34

, it is only Scandinavian countries wherein

women have got true representation in senior management position through formal

legislations and mandatory reforms in Corporate Governance norms. The disparity is clearly

visible amongst even the European nations with some countries initiating mandatory policies

for women empowerment and representation; while others have merely provided

recommendations under Corporate Governance norms for registering diversity and women

inclusiveness. The question that arises herewith is; whether the picture portrayal of stronger

women representation in some European nations vis-à-vis their counterparts has any linkage

to the gender disparity and status existing in these countries which may be either historical or

culture based.

Adler (1986) through her study on the global scenario of women in management gives an

interesting portrayal of different nations in the context of female managers. She cites that the

reason Sweden leads the gender equality chart in terms of labour force participation rates may

be attributable to separate taxation norms for married women in 1971 and parenthood

insurance introduced in 1974 along with norms for flexible work arrangements and strong

societal support by the government through child-care facilities, ensuring higher percentage

of married women in the workforce. This fact is supported through the ILO Women in

Labour markets report 2011, which details aspects of other Scandinavian nations like Finland

and the Netherlands where female labour employment rates have increased significantly with

a sharp rise in the Netherlands (at 19.1%), which has been attributed to strong support by the

concerned governments in initiating policies that support women career development like

part-time working arrangement, child care facilities etc. The report cites that in the

Netherlands, part-time employment is almost a female domain with female part-time

employment rates being the highest in the European Union at 59.9% in 2008.35

However the

issue on gender disparity across EU nations exists with Adler (1986) citing a difference in the

perception towards female managers across these countries wherein ‘Most organizations had

never thought of creating policies for women development”. The belief that women could and

can make a difference at top level management was almost beyond the realms of imagination

by most businesses, a societal expression so deeply engrained that even women executives in

some countries (see Italy, Adler 1986, Pg 13) believed that the onus for this change in

perception is the responsibility of women and they need to prove themselves capable of

handling such senior positions before any form of societal change. A though process radically

different from US women executives who believe that change is needed first in form of

societal support than women themselves making a difference.

The contrast is stark across Asian and Pacific nations where this gender occupies mostly

lower level roles and position with a miniscule percent reaching the higher echelons of

management. The UNDP Asia-Pacific Human Development Report 2010, states that there

seems to be wider diversity on gender rights even within sub-regions of Asia-Pacific, wherein

34

Refer Women Participation in Workforce-Trends 35

Refer ILO Women in Labour Markets Report -2011, Pg 71


governance

Soumi Rai



62

East Asia and Pacific are moving ahead but South-Asia still lags behind on parameters like

health, adult literacy and economic participation; at times even behind sub-Saharan regions.

This report gives a glimpse of the real status of women in the APAC region being an eye-

opener for political and economic strategists who seem to gloat over the rapid progress and

economic development happening across these regions without caring about inclusion of

minority groups in its purview.

Adler (1986) cites the case of developed nations like Japan wherein cultural viewpoints cloud

organizational attitude towards women representation in managerial positions with disparity

existing in their career progression, pay levels and quality of work. Japanese women

themselves believe employment to be a ‘stop-gap’ arrangement between ‘marriage’ and

‘child-birth’, striving to balance both as part of their sole responsibility. The situation does

not change much with other nations of the region like Philippines and Indonesia where strong

viewpoints towards women as nurturers and providers for the family dominate their career

progression as managers, with women seldom echoing their stand in the business domain

relegating themselves to administrative or low paying jobs like nursing and teaching trying to

walk the tight rope of work-life balance. Budhwar et al (2005) argues this in the case of India,

wherein women have been deprived of responsible roles at managerial levels due to cultural

factors and societal viewpoint; contrary to the belief of women not being capable of

managerial roles, their study summarizes strengths of Indian women managers in the context

of adaptability to situations, collaborative work style, crisis management capabilities and

sensitivity in managing work relationships making them better and capable candidates for

leadership in the new economic order of a volatile business environment.

5. Conclusions

Women have forever been understood to be the creator of ‘life’, the nurturer, the giver and

the one who anchors men in various roles as mother, sister, daughter, wife or lover/partner.

History has been witness to numerous instances of the downfall or rise of nations; centered

on the strategic decisions of powerful women albeit in some instances from behind the

curtain in shadowed forms. Through centuries, from ancient times to the modern era, women

have time and again proved their capabilities as competent leaders combining their intuitive

sense with practical knowledge for informed strategic decision making creating and

managing successful empires, governments and businesses. Still despite these glorious

achievements and progressing levels of education, women across the world have been

relegated to the status of second citizens of their respective countries bearing disparity in

professional domains by way of low level profiles, pay discrepancies and biased attitude

towards progression.

The intention of this paper was in consolidating the vast amount of literature and data

pertaining to women participation levels in the workforce while highlighting their presence at

senior management positions specifically at the boardroom level in the global context. It was

necessary that going along the path, an understanding of the need for diversity across

boardrooms and strong representation of women in line with enhancing this diversity aspect

be clearly outlined.

The paper has tried to create a portrayal of the global situation by highlighting aspects of

enhanced participation in the developed nations (mostly nations in the European and the

American continent), though stagnating and growing at a slow pace in some instances;


governance

Soumi Rai



63

against the pathetic situation existing across countries in the Asia-Pacific region, Africa and

the Middle-east.

While countries have tried to address the lack of women representation at leadership

positions and board levels under diversity, equal employment opportunity and corporate

governance parameters; the methods, norms and policies adopted have been varied. Most

European nations, specifically the Nordic countries having strong presence of women in their

workforce; have supported board room presence of the ‘fair sex’ through stringent

legislations facing dissolution of concerned companies (publicly listed) in case of non-

compliance. Other nations, part of the European Union have modified their Corporate

Governance norms by way of encouraging women representation on boards with reasons and

explanation by concerned companies for non-compliance rather than stringent measures,

along with debating implementation of legislations for higher compliance levels. Following

them are countries like USA, Canada and Australia that have moved towards briefly

increasing women representation on their corporate boards by way of modifying corporate

governance codes and ethics. Lagging behind are the rapidly developing nations of Asia, with

lowest participation of female in management positions, more so at leadership levels. Japan is

a contradiction in this region with alarmingly low level of participation by women at senior

management and board room levels, despite being a developed nation; that only outlines the

negative co-relation between GDP and women empowerment.

Norway seems to be the only country that has vociferously supported women empowerment

in business through mandatory corporate quotas in public sector companies, but preliminary

research on its impact also seems to outline a vague picture that is more causal than factual.

Eight years in research parlance is too little a time span to collect empirical evidence co-

relating increased women participation on boards to mandatory corporate quotas and thereby

enhanced firm performances. Most countries are still trying to figure a mid-way on this path

while public companies grappling with the situation, are trying to figure how best they can

search and source talented women capable of adding decisional diversity in the boardrooms.

Empirical research in the future needs to diligently track data related to evidence suggesting

enhanced growth of institution with female presence strengthening the business case of

women related diversity in board rooms. Future research needs to also focus on the Asia-

Pacific region to understand parameters that hinder progress and participation of women in

the workforce specifically at leadership and decision making levels. The context of whether

this is culture specific or gender biased shall need further exploration. However it is

heartening to note that the trail has been blazed by Norway and it is only sometime that other

shall follow through, when and how is the question?

6. References

1. Adler N.J., (1986), Women in management worldwide, International studies of

management & organization , 16(3/4), pp 3-32

2. Banerji, A., Mahtani, S., Sealy, R. & Vinnicombe, S., (2010), Standard Chartered

Bank: Women on corporate boards in India 2010. International centre for women

leaders, Cranfield school of management. Retrieved on 11th

Nov 2011, from:

http://www.communitybusiness.org/images/cb/publications/2010/WOB_India.pdf


governance

Soumi Rai



64

3. Bilimoria, D., (2000a), Building the business case for women corporate directors. In:

Burke, R. and Mattis, M. (eds.) Women on corporate boards of directors: International

challenges and opportunities, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands,

pp 25–40

4. Budhwar, P. S., Saini, D. S., & Bhatnagar, J., (2005), Women in management in the

new economic environment: The case of India, Asia Pacific business review, 11(2),

pp 179-193.

5. Burke R., (1997), Women on Corporate Boards of Directors: A needed resource

journal of business ethics, Women in Corporate Management, 16(9), pp 909-915,

Springer

6. Charan R., (1998), Boards at work: How corporate boards create competitive

advantage, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

7. Flynn P. and Adams S., (2004), Women on board, Bized, Retrieved on 5th

Nov 2011,

from: http://www.aacsb.edu/publications/archives/sepoct04/p34-39.pdf

8. Hodoson R. and Sullivan T.A., (2008), The social organization of work, Thompson

Learning.

9. Pande R. and Ford D., (2011), Gender quotas and female leadership: A review,

Background paper for the world development report on gender, Retrieved on Nov 16th

2011, from: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/rpande/papers/ Gender% 20 Quotas% 20-

%20April%202011.pdf

10. Matsa, D. & Miller, A., (2011), A female style in corporate leadership? Evidence

from quotas, Working paper, Retrieved on 17th

Nov 2011, from:

http://www.nber.org/public_html/confer/2011/SI2011/LS/Matsa_Miller.pdf

11. Norburn D., (1989), The CEO: A breed apart, The strategic management journal, 10,

pp 1-15

12. Rachel Soares, Jan Combopiano, Allyson Regis, Yelena Shur, and Rosita Wong,

(2010) Catalyst Census: Fortune 500 Women Board Directors (Catalyst, 2010),

Retrieved on 11th

Nov 2011, from: http://www.catalyst.org/file/ 476/qt_ women

_on_boards.pdf

13. Srinivas S., Allen R. and Sakamoto S., (1999), Cross cultural study of attitudes

toward women as managers in four countries, Presented at the international

conference, Academy of Business and Administrative Sciences (ABAS) retrieved on

6th

Nov 2011, from: (www.sba.muohio.edu/abas/1999/srinivsh.pdf)

14. Singh, V., Vinnicombe, S. and Johnson, P., (2001), Women directors on top UK

boards, Corporate Governance: An international review, 9(3), pp 206–16.

15. Singh V. and Vinicombe S., (2005), Female FTSE report 2005 – New look directors

add value to FTSE 100 boards, Published by school of management, Cranfield


governance

Soumi Rai



65

university, Retrieved on 8th

Nov 2011, from: http://www.som.cranfield.ac.uk/

som/dinamic-content/research/documents/ftse2005full.pdf

16. Vinicombe S., Sealy R., Graham J., and Doldor E., (2010), Female FTSE report 2010

– Opening up the appointment process, Published by international centre for women

leaders, Cranfield school of management, Cranfield university, Retrieved on 8th

Nov

2011, from: http://www.som.cranfield.ac.uk/som/dinamic-content/research/

documents/FemaleFTSEReport2010.pdf

17. Terjesen, S. and Singh, V., (2008), Female presence on corporate boards: A multi-

country study of environmental context, Journal of business ethics, 83(1), pp 55–63.

18. Terjesen, S., Sealy R. and Singh, V., (2009), Women directors on corporate boards: A

Review and research agenda, Corporate governance: An international review, 17(3),

pp 320–337

19. Westphal J. and Zajac E., (1995), Who shall govern, CEO power, demographic

similarity and director selection, Administrative science quarterly, 40, pp 60-83

20. Economic survey 2007 – 2008, Retrieved on Nov 4th

2011, from:

(http://www.indiabudget.nic.in)

21. Effect of the Norwegian quota legislations for board, Mari Teigen and Vibeke

Heidenreich, Retrieved on Nov 5th

2011, from: http://www.boardimpact.com/PDF/

MariTeigenogVibekeHeidenreich.pdf

22. EOWA 2010-Australian census of women in leadership, Retrieved 11th

Nov 2010,

from: http://www.catalyst.org/file/405/eowa%202010%20australian%20census%20of

%20women%20in%20leadership.pdf

23. European union Labour Force Survey (Eurostat), 2009, Retrieved on Nov 4th

2011,

from: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-QA-10-035/EN/KS-

QA-10-035-EN.PDF

24. European union labour force survey (Eurostat), 2010, Retrieved on 9th

Nov 2011,

from: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-11-030/EN/KS-

SF-11-030-EN.PDF

25. European board diversity analysis 2010, Egon Zehnder international, Retrieved on 9th

Nov 2011, from: http://www.egonzehnder.com/global/thoughtleadership/hottopic/

id/78402633/publication/id/17500251

26. Fourth Bi-annual European board monitor 2010, Retrieved on Nov 4th

2011, from:

(http://www.europeanpwn.net/files/4th_bwm_2010_press_release_04-10-2010.pdf)

27. Governance Metrics international, Women on boards: A statistical review by country,

Sector, and supersector (2010), Retrieved on Nov 4th

2011, from:

http://www.gmiratings.com/(bnnl3555sqbsvh551v2jfs55)/hp/Women_on_Boards_-

_A_Statistical_Review_from_GMI_-_3_2_09.pdf


governance

Soumi Rai



66

28. ILO, Economically active population: Estimates and projections, 1950-2010 (4th

edition, Geneva, 1996), Retrieved on Nov 4th

2011, from: http://www.ilo.org/global/

statistics-and-databases/WCMS_087891/lang--en/index.htm

29. ILO Global employment trends for women, March 2009, Retrieved on Nov 4th

2011,

from: http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@dgreports/@dcomm/documents/

publication/wcms_103456.pdf

30. ILO Global employment trends 2011, Retrieved on Nov 4th

2011, from:

http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@dgreports/@dcomm/@publ/documents/p

ublication/wcms_150440.pdf

31. ILO - Women in labour markets, Measuring progress and identifying challenges,

March 2010, pp 1-109, Retrieved on Nov 4th

2011, from:

http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_emp/---emp_elm/--- trends/

documents/publication/wcms_123835.pdf

32. Korn/Ferry international asian board diversity report 2011, Retrieved on 9th

Nov 2011,

from:http://www.kornferryinstitute.com/files/pdf1/Asias_boardroom_gender _gap.pdf

33. More women in senior positions, European commission, Retrieved on Nov 5th

2011,

from: ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=4746&langId=en

34. Statistics Norway, Board representatives, by gender, age groups, level of education,

size groups and economic activity, (2010), Retrieved on Nov 5th

2011, from:

http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/10/styre_en/tab-2010-06-11-01-en.html

35. The Economist, female power, Dec 30th

2009, Retrieved on Nov 5th

2011, from:

(http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15174418)

36. The Epoch Times, The Norwegian 'Big Stick': Women on boards, Kellie Tranter,

July 07 2008, Retrieved on Nov 6th

2011, from: (http://back2003.en.epochtimes.com/

news/8-7-7/73015.html)

37. Third Bi-annual European board Monitor 2008, Retrieved on Nov 6th

2011, from:

(http://www.europeanpwn.net/index.php?article_id=561)

38. UNDP Asia-Pacific human development report, 2010, Retrieved on 9th

Nov 2011,

from: http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/regionalreports/asiathepacific/RHDR-2010-

AsiaPacific.pdf

39. Women in the boardroom: a global perspective, Deloitte 2011 report, Retrieved on

Nov 16th

2011, from: http://www.corpgov.deloitte.com/binary/com.epicentric.content

management.servlet.ContentDeliveryServlet/USEng/Documents/Nominating-

Corporate%20Governance%20Committee/Board%20Composition%20and%20Recrui

tment/Women%20in%20the%20Boardroom_Deloitte_012011.pdf

40. Women matter 2010, Mckinsey report, Retrieved on Nov 5th

2011, from:

http://www.mckinsey.com/locations/swiss/news_publications/pdf/women_matter_201

0_4.pdf


governance

Soumi Rai



67

41. Women on corporate boards – Catalyst 2010 census of US fortune 500 companies,

Retrieved on Nov 5th

2011, from: http://www.catalyst.org/file/413/2010_us_census_

women_board_directors_final.pdf

42. Women in management in Canada, Catalyst survey, March 2011, Retrieved on Nov

5th

2011, from: http://www.catalyst.org/file/448/qt_women_in_mgmt_in_canada.pdf

43. Nasscom India reports on education and employment, Retrieved on Nov 6th

2011,

available at www.nasscom.org.