legislated gender quotas

25
LEGISLATED GENDER QUOTAS THE SLEDGE HAMMER WITH WHICH THE GLASS CEILING IS BROKEN?

Upload: paul-kehoe

Post on 16-Apr-2017

266 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Legislated Gender Quotas

LEGISLATED GENDER QUOTASTHE SLEDGE HAMMER WITH WHICH THE GLASS CEILING IS BROKEN?

Page 2: Legislated Gender Quotas

Nicoll Curtin Equality, Diversity &

Inclusion Report March 2015

CONTENTS

Contents

Introduction: “Breaking the Glass Ceiling” Women on Boards: The European Statistics The Quotas The Pros and the Cons Appointment of Women vs. “Crowd-Out” of Others Promotion of Female Talent vs. Appointment of the Under-qualified Pipeline: Encouraging Women’s Aspirations vs. Handing Women Opportunities The Improvement of Financial Performance vs. Unquantifiable Financial Results Diverse Perspectives vs. Homogenous Group Thinking The Norway Story The Resistance Emergence of the “Golden Skirts” Looking Beyond Traditional Sources Developing the Female Talent Pipeline The Earnings Gender Gap Board Efficiency The UK Story The Emergence of Transparent, Voluntary Targets Developing the Female Talent Pipeline Our Progress Conclusion From The AuthorAbout usReferences

2

34578899

10111112131414151617181920212223

Page 3: Legislated Gender Quotas

“Breaking the Glass Ceiling” - an organising thought amongst both women attempting to progress their careers and organisations attempting to diversify their leadership. But what is the glass ceiling?In 1986 Carol Hymowitz and Timothy D.Schellardt pub-lished an article in The Wall Street Journal entitled “The Glass Ceiling: Why Women Can’t Seem to Break the Invisible Barrier That Blocks Them from the Top Jobs” both coining and defining the term. However, is this definition still applicable? Is the barrier to women in advancement of their careers still invisible, unseen, and unacknowl-edged? Is it glass? You cannot read an article or book, attend a forum or join a network, or find any other reference to women in busi-ness and leadership without

stumbling upon this phrase.As such, organisations and governments globally have been looking for tools to break the glass ceiling. These tools have taken the form of anti-discriminations laws, mentoring schemes, leader-ship skills training for women, the training of leaders on the perils of unconscious bias – the list of recommendations goes on.One tool in particular has been identified as the “sledge hammer” with which the glass ceiling is broken: legislated

quotas for gender diversity on boards. In Norway a 40% gender quota for boards was introduced in December 2003. Female representation then jumped from 15.9% in 2004, to 37.0% in 2007, and finally reached the 40% target in 2008. On 20th November 2013, the European parlia-ment voted in favour of a proposed draft law that would require 40% female board members in 5,000 listed com-panies in the European Union by 2020.

Breaking the glass ceiling

In the UK women’s representation on FTSE 100:

In 2013/14 women accounted for 28% of board appointments

accross FTSE 100

There are only 2 remaining all male

boardsWomen account

for 20.7% of

overall board directorships

The FTSE 250 have achieved:

In 2013/14 women accounted for 33% of board appointments

accross FTSE 250

There are only 2 remaining all male boards Women account

for 16.5% of

overall board directorships

There are 48 remaining all male boards

Source: Great Britain, Department for Business, Innovation & Skills , “Women on boards Davies Review Annual Report 2014

INTRODUCTION

3

Page 4: Legislated Gender Quotas
Page 5: Legislated Gender Quotas

Iceland passed a quota law in 2010, which legislated a minimum representation of 40% from each sex on the boards of publicly owned and publicly limited compa-nies with more than 50 employees. There are no official sanctions for non-compli-ance.

In February 2002, the Norwegian government set a deadline of July 2005 for private listed companies to raise the proportion of women on their boards to 40%. By July 2005, there was only 24% female representation. In January 2006 legislation was introduced extending the final deadline for compliance to January 2008, after which they would face fines or even closure. Full compliance was achieved by 2009.

ICELAND

NORWAY

In January 2011, France adopted a quota law that obliges listed companies and companies employing at least 500 employees and with revenues over € 50 million to appoint at least 20% women on their boards within 3 years and 40% within 6 years. The main penalty of the law is that an appointment of a board member that does not meet the criteria in terms of gender will be rendered invalid.

FRANCE

The “Law of Equality,” was approved in 2007. The law recommends listed companies appoint women to up to 40% of all board seats by 2015. There are no sanctions for non-compliance, however the Spanish Government has pointed out that it will take compliance into consideration when assign-ing certain public contracts.

SPAIN

THE QUOTAS

5

Page 6: Legislated Gender Quotas

Boards of state-owned companies are required to have an 'equitable proportion of women and men'. From 2008, the corporate governance code requires that every board should have at least one man and one woman. Although there are no official sanc-tions, there is a “comply or explain” code that requires transparency and explanation of efforts to achieve board gender diversity.

FINLAND

On 12 August 2011, Law 120 “Gender Balance on the Boards of Listed Companies,” became effective. The legis-lation requires at least 20% of board members to be female by 2015 and 33% to be female by 2018. If a company does not comply in due time a fine will be applied of a minimum of 100,000 euros to a maximum of 1 million euros for the board, and a minimum of 20,000 euros to a maximum of 200,000 euros for the board of statutory auditors. If the failure continues, the board of directors or the board of statutory auditors will be replaced.

ITALY

In December of 2009 the government approved a quota which went into effect in 2013. The legislation requires at least 30% of board members to be male and 30% to be female by 2016. The appointment of the remaining 40% will be at the discretion of the company. Again, there are no official sanc-tions however the “comply or explain” code applies.

THE NETHERLANDS

The Belgian law on gender diversity was approved in 2011 and legislates that all boards must have a minimum of one-third male direc-tors and one-third female directors. In the context that directors’ mandates are usually for a six-year period (the maximum allowed), the quota remains in effect from the first day of the sixth fiscal year following the publication of the law. Sanctions for non-compliance include the loss of benefits for board members, or non-com-pliant appointments being rendered invalid.

BELGIUM

THE QUOTAS

6

Page 7: Legislated Gender Quotas

Pipeline: Encouraging Women’s Aspirations

vs. Handing Women Opportunities

THE PROS AND CONS

Appointment of Women vs. “Crowd-Out” of Others

The Davies Report details the key themes cited by respondents as barriers causing women to be under-represented in posi-tions of seniority:

30 30

22

18

2

31

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Attitude in the w

orkplace

Work environm

ent

Career A

dvancement

Promotion/ H

iring Recruit

Com

pensations/Benefits

Miscellaneous

Quotas can be instrumental in removing barriers and rendering bias or discrimination irrele-vant, by reserving seats specifically for female appointments.

The flipside to this is that gender quotas may ‘crowd out’ other under-represented groups; by reserving certain positions for women, there will be fewer positions open for these candi-dates. Men may also be negatively affected.

attitude was referred to by 30% with bias, prejudice or stereo-typical behaviour being the top factor

22% responded that it was the lack of career advancement, often due to a lack of opportunities

18% of respondents described issues around recruitment and promotion, including the likelihood of men recruiting men, or of people recruiting in their own image.

7

Page 8: Legislated Gender Quotas

Pipeline: Encouraging Women’s Aspirations

vs. Handing Women Opportunities

THE PROS AND CONS

The reservation of board posi-tions for women indeed allows opportunities for talented, experienced and qualified women that may not have previously had access.

However this is only the case if there is a qualified woman available to fill each of these reserved seats. Those oppos-ing gender quotas suggest that this is not the case. If quotas encourage the promo-tion of inexperienced women (and experience, in turn, predicts performance), there would certainly be negative results.

The unavailability of qualified women for board positions is

certainly unproven. However, widespread concern regarding the number of women that are qualified in the corporate sphere could have a positive impact: organisations invest-ing in the development of female employees ensuring a pipeline of experienced future leaders. A future pipeline is also improved by gender equality on boards since it creates role models for women in less senior positions. As Rohini Pande, noted economist and Harvard Professor, writes:‘Mandated female lead-ers may serve as role models for other aspiring women [...] a female board director can effec-tively demonstrate the payoff of being a female director to other aspiring businesswomen and acquire expertise on how to effectively manoeuvre as a female director in a traditionally male-dominated envi-ronment.’

Quotas allow women to perceive positions of leader-ship as more realistic and attainable aspirations, encour-aging women to invest in corporate advancement. It is argued that the reverse can be true: a quota can reduce a woman’s incentive to invest if she believes her path toward advancement has been made easier with a gender quota.

Promotion of Female Talent vs.

Appointment of the Under-qualified

8

Page 9: Legislated Gender Quotas

A Catalyst study of over 520 organisations in the Fortune 500 over 4 years found that companies with more women were found to outperform their rivals with: 42% higher return in sales 66% higher return on invested capital 53% higher return on equity However it is difficult to prove the economic outcome of gender diversity of boards. As Rohini writes:

The Improvement of Financial Performance vs. Unquantifiable Financial Results

It may be that higher performing firms choose to have more female directors and managers. Much of the empirical litera-ture on diversity is unable to account for the fact that better performing companies may also be led by individuals who favour diversity .

THE PROS AND CONS

Diverse Perspectives vs. Homogenous Group Thinking

Homogeneousness in leadership is more likely to promote group thinking. Evidence shows that companies make stronger decisions where a range of perspectives, drawing on different life experiences, contribute. That range of perspectives must include those of women. Women bring different viewpoints and voices to the table, to the debate and to the decisions. This allows organi-sations to be reflective of and responsive to the market: Women now form 51% of the UK popula-tion and 46% of the economically active workforce. They are estimated to be responsible for about 70% of household purchasing decisions and to hold almost half of the UK’s wealth. Having women [in leadership], who in many cases would represent the users and customers of the com-panies’ products, could improve understanding of customer needs, leading to more informed decision making.

9

Page 10: Legislated Gender Quotas

THE NORWAY STORY

Perhaps the most widely know example of a corporate gender quota is in Norway. Norway is heralded as an exemplar to the power of gender quotas in successfully diversifying the gender of corporate boards, having reached their 40% target by 2008.

However, does this statistic alone allow conclusion that the quotas’ implementation was a success? Were the objectives of implementing the quota met? What were the knock on impacts of its implementation?

2003

Female represen-tation then jumped to 37.0% in 2007, and finally reached the 40% target in 2008.

2004 2006 2008

In 2004 women still only repre-sented 15.9% of boards. This increase was not enough, too few companies were in compliance.

In 2006 the law became compul-sory and firms that did not comply by Janu-ary 2008 would be dissolved.

In late 2003, Norway passed a law mandating 40% representa-tion of each gender on the board of publicly limited liability companies.

10

Page 11: Legislated Gender Quotas

THE NORWAY STORY

There were a number of reasons companies were not complying prior to the 2006 sanctions. One concern which was most vocalised by oppo-nents to the legislation was that there were not enough qualified women in Norway to fill 40% of board seats.

As a result, and to illustrate their objection, organisations decided to feign compliance by appointing women to their board without relevant qualifi-cations, experience or compe-tencies in the expectation they would have minimal input and therefore impact on board decisions. As Marianne Bertrand, Profes-sor of Economics at the Uni-versity of Chicago and Research Fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research writes:

If high quality women cannot be found, the quotas may backfire and reinforce nega-tive stereotypes, resulting in a “patronizing equilibrium” with fewer women investing further in their careers as they see that it does not “take much” to become a board member.’

Indeed if unqualified women are appointed then the bene-fits of legislated gender quotas may be hugely reduced; the appointed women would not have the experience to improve efficiency or profit, they would not be viewed as role models for success by women, and they would not reduce any biases against women in the corporate sphere. In practice, in Norway: ‘the average observable quali-fications of the women appointed to the boards of publicly limited companies significantly improved after the

reform. While there is a sub-stantial gap in observable qualifications between male and female board members both before and after the reform, this gap is substantial-ly smaller after the reform.’ Many argue that the concerns regarding a lack of qualified women in Norway are not negated by this statistic, as the reform resulted in a small number of qualified women holding multiple directorships simultaneously.

As Harriet Alexander writes for The Times:

This created the phenomenon of the so-called "golden skirts," a group of around 70 women who hold multiple directorships, allegedly because there is not enough female business talent to go around.

The Resistance

Emergence of the “Golden Skirts”

11

Page 12: Legislated Gender Quotas

This perspective is supported by a few highly publicised, key examples from within theindustry. Richard Milne writes in the Financial Times:‘Shortly after Norway proposed a law forcing listed companies to have women as 40 per cent of their directors, Mimi Berdal's telephone started ringing off the hook. The former corporate lawyer was contacted by many of the 500 or so companies that were scrambling to fill their boards with the requisite number of women. She now sits on 12 boards and regular-ly tops newspaper lists of the most prominent business-women. But Ms Berdal is just one of what have become known as the "golden skirts", a group of Norwegian women who have become full-time non-executive directors on the back of the law.’ However, ‘it seems there are more "golden trousers" than "golden skirts": according to the Centre for Corporate

Diversity in Oslo, only two in 10 women hold more than one board position while four in 10 men have multiple directorships.’

In order to ensure that the appointment of under quali-fied, ‘token’ women did not occur, the government creat-ed a database of women interested in being appointed

to boards to make women’s competence more visible. There was an upswing in the number of women-focused executive search firms and networking organisations.

THE NORWAY STORY

Looking Beyond Traditional Sources

12

Page 13: Legislated Gender Quotas

THE NORWAY STORY

Developing the Female Talent Pipeline

Example Case Study: The Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO)

The Confederation of Norwegian Enterprise (NHO), con-ceived programme by the name of ‘Female Future follow-ing the legislation of gender quotas.

‘Female Future is a leadership and boardroom competence development programme for the enterprise’s own talents. Female Future is the NHO’s effort to recruit more women to senior executive positions and to the boardroom. The enterprises nominate their talents to the programme.’

By 2010, 1250 women have been nominated by their enter-prise to complete the Female Future Programme and 62% of these participants have been promoted to a senior exec-utive position/board position or both.

The NHO now acknowledges “that it is only because of the law and the public debate it provoked that real change has happened.”

Businesses have not only had to look beyond traditional sources for qualified female candidates, but develop the women within their organisa-tions for future directorships to ensure a strong pipeline of female leadership. Indeed, this development led to main-tain future compliance to the quota.

Indeed, following the quotas resulting focus on building female leadership within busi-nesses ‘Career expectations of young women in business went up, with many viewing the reform as improving their future earnings or increasing the likelihood of making it to the very top corporate eche-lons. It is possible that the positive mindset the reforms induced among young women in business will ultimately encourage them to stay on the fast track for longer.’

13

Page 14: Legislated Gender Quotas

A focus on the development of female staff combined with the influence of appointed women on boards is expected to yield an increase in women occupying managerial posi-tions through all levels of the company. As of yet, there is no quantitative evidence to sug-gest this has been the case.

This is reflective of the observable changes in earn-ings gender gap. There is evidence suggestive of a growing representation of female employees at the very top of the earnings distribu-tion. However, the representa-tion of women does not improve anywhere else in the firms’ income distribution (top 95th percentile, top 90th percentile, top 75th percen-tile).

To date, the evidence on the stock market response to the quota remains inconclusive and contradictory. However qualitative assessments of board efficiency have found that: ‘Among male board members – those who presumably would be nega-tively affected – 12 percent express that the

quality of board work has increased, and 11 percent that it has deteriorated. In other words four out of five perceive no difference. Among the group of men experiencing positive changes, the majority point to women contributing different perspectives and bringing about more discus-sion.’

THE NORWAY STORY

The Earnings Gender Gap

Board Efficiency

14

Page 15: Legislated Gender Quotas

THE UK STORY

The Davies report, published in February of 2011 called for action within UK companies to address gender imbalance. The Davies report has set targets for UK companies which call for voluntary but strongly concerted action:

‘All Chairmen of FTSE 350 companies should set out the percentage of women they aim to have on their boards in 2013 and 2015. FTSE 100 boards should aim for a minimum of 25% female repre-sentation by 2015 and we expect that many will achieve a higher figure. Chairmen should announce their aspirational goals within the next six months (by September 2011). Also we expect all Chief Executives to review the percentage of women they aim to have on their Executive Committees in 2013 and 2015.’

Women’s representation on FTSE 100 boards now stands at 20.7%, up from 12.5% in 2011, with only two all male boards remaining. The FTSE 250 have achieved 15.6%, up from 7.8% in 2011 - with 83 of the FTSE 250 all male boards in 2011 now having recruited one or more women onto their boards.

Lord Davies writes that: ‘At the start of our review, we were overwhelmed by voices from Chairmen, companies and others asking for a business led voluntary framework, as opposed to legislative quotas or EU intervention. British business said they could fix this on their own. The world is now watching with real interest to see if they can. We need to turn these words into action, to raise the bar and to prove it.’

In 2012 women made up only 12.5% of the mem-bers of the corporate boards of FTSE 100 compa-nies. This was up from 9.4% in 2004, but this rate of increase was undeniably slow.

15

Page 16: Legislated Gender Quotas

THE UK STORY

Although the UK have set no legislated quotas, organisa-tions are autonomously diver-sifying the gender of their boards transparently and determinedly by setting their own voluntary targets and publishing their progress in annual and transparency reports across the FTSE 100, for example:

EY has committed to targets of 30% female and 10% BME representation in their new partner intake (comprising both internal promotes and external hires), measured on a 3-year rolling period. In 2014, 26% of their new partner promotions were women.

Companies are certainly being more transparent about

gender equality. This is demonstrated by the number of companies who have signed up to the Government initiative Think, Act, Report, a simple step-by-step frame-work to help companies think about gender equality in their workforces, particularly in relation to recruitment, reten-tion, promotion and pay. Over 250 companies have volun-tarily signed up.

The supporting of senior women through their career progression has come to prominence in the corporate sphere:

A whole new industry has developed since the publica-tion of the Davies Review in 2011[...] thriving new compa-nies offer valuable services, including the mentoring and coaching of capable and younger aspiring women, and diagnostics and route maps to help organisations effect real change.

The Emergence of Transparent,

Voluntary Targets

16

Page 17: Legislated Gender Quotas

THE UK STORY

UK businesses are taking time and initiative in developing their pipeline of female talent, perhaps due to the voluntary nature of UK gender targets allowing a focus on long term and organic improvement in diversity. Across the FTSE 100, the UK is witnessing internal schemes, networks and initiatives launching and successfully developing women. Key examples of suc-cessful schemes include:

Developing The Female Talent Pipeline Asda’s ‘Women in Leadership’ Programme

This programme is aimed specifically at female workers in roles below senior management. Workers who have strong leadership potential are referred to the programme by their managers or identified through talent planning tools. The two year programme addresses key barriers for female workers and concludes with a legacy project that enables them to pass on their learning to others and ‘pay it forward’, both to women in the business and in the community as well. So far over 530 women have taken part.

The RBS Focused Women’s Network (FWN)

The Network was launched in 2007 to support the group in actively attracting, developing and retaining talented women at RBS. In 2012 a dedicated FWN coordinator was appoint-ed and a significant budget for the network was established. FWN runs workshops on subjects including: confidence building, leadership skills, internal interview skills, network-ing skills, creating a personal brand, transitioning to flexible working, managing promotion/career change, preparing for redundancy. In the last 3 years, the FWN has grown from 2,000 to 6,000 members across 31 countries.

17

Page 18: Legislated Gender Quotas

THE UK STORY

Our Progress

Although we have come a very long way since 2011, continued and concerted action is still needed to reach the 25% target in 2015.

The graph above shows that in the last year we have recovered from previous underperformance and are getting closer to the necessary trajectory. In 2011-2012 27% of FTSE 100 board appoint-ments were women, 34% in 2012-2103 and 28% in 2013-2014. If we have continued to increase at the same trajectory the 25% target will be met or exceeded. If we have slowed down to the rate of progress achieved before 2013, it will be missed.

Source: Women on boards Davies Review Annual Report 2014

18

Page 19: Legislated Gender Quotas

CONCLUSION

According to the 2014 International Business Report, the percentage of world business leaders in favour of gender quotas has increased from 37% in 2013 to 45% in 2014. However the UK govern-ment is resolutely opposed to their implementation.

They have the backing of some senior figures. In reference to the European parliament vote in favour of a proposed draft law that would require 40% female board members, Helena Morrissey (CEO, Newton Investment Management and 30% Club founder) said

Indeed, as of yet, there is no quantitative evidence from Norway to suggest an increase in women occupying managerial positions since the implementation of the legislated quota. Equally the evidence on the stock market response to the quota remains inconclusive and contradictory. Only 12 % of male board members express that the quality of board work has increased and 11% that it has deteriorated.

This could perhaps be attributed to the appointment or promotion of under-qualified or inexperi-enced women in order to meet a legislated quota within a defined time frame. Therefore it could be argued that voluntary targets would instead allow a more organic growth, the development of a wider talent pool of qualified and experienced women and therefore result in a more demonstrable business impact.

This is disappointing, unhelpful and unnecessary […] Appointing women to boards on anything other than merit only creates an optical solution and does nothing to improve gender balance at management levels.

19

Page 20: Legislated Gender Quotas

‘France, Holland, Spain and Italy – as well as most of Scandinavia – already endorse quotas[…] With Germany, our biggest busi-ness competitor, this week deciding to join them, the centre of gravity is moving decisive-ly. If Britain continues to block gender parity across the EU, then we will not only penalise women but also lose credibility as the Europe-an financial capital.’

Mary Honeyball, a Labour MEP, cautioned that it would be a “pyrrhic victory” if the UK government successfully opposed the proposals, elaborating that:

However, as the graph on page 18 demonstrates, if the UK continue to increase the number of women on boards at the same trajectory the 25% voluntary target set by the Davies Report will be met or exceeded. Although this is far from achieving 40% representation, it demonstrates the power of concerted action and desire for change in organically and sustainably achieving diverse UK workforces; with-out the need for legislative quotas and the possible negative consequences they can entail.

CONCLUSION

20

Page 21: Legislated Gender Quotas

FROM THE AUTHOR

This debate is one of many Equality and Diversity issues which are highly discussed currently, and the first of many such topics we will be providing research on in 2015.

As search consultants, we discuss diversity (specifically though not exclusively in relation to female leader-ship) with senior business stakeholders on a continuing basis.

A typical discussion of a mandate will encompass a number of required attributes, categorised as “essen-tial” and “nice to have”. These essential skills are frequently found to automatically narrow the long-list to predominantly male. Why? What are often considered essential skills by employers are in fact examples of directly parallel experience, in what have been traditionally male industries.

Therefore it is at this point in the discussion we seek to broaden what are considered “essential skills”. We determine the appetite to hire from outside the industry - to look for equally valid and translatable experi-ence, increasing the chances of securing female talent.

Too often, as the process evolves, favour belongs to the applicant who will offer the least management during transition; the applicant with the most direct and parallel experience, often the male applicant. A female applicant, equally as qualified, equally as able, with valuable and translatable skills garnered in a different industry is overlooked.

Could legislated gender quotas be the key to removing this frustration? Could they be key to redefining what essential skills are, by forcing employers to cast their nets wider? Forcing employers to see the value in different, non-conventional career paths?

Indeed, legislated gender quotas have been shown to rapidly and successfully increase the number of women on boards; however is this rapid change sustainable? Or does this allow the promotion of under qualified women at the detriment of business? Or over-stretch those women who are qualified and end up holding multiple directorships?

Voluntary quotas are showing a slower, but notable increase in gender equality in multiple countries. This growth could perhaps be considered more sustainable; organically growing and developing female talent. However, without sanctions for non-compliance will this continue? Will the desire for change be enough to demolish that glass ceiling? Will that be achieved before the damningly distant prediction of gender equality achieved in 2095?

This paper cannot be concluded one way or the other in regards to what methods the UK should take in diversifying our boards. Whether we elect to use legislated or voluntary gender quotas – there are advan-tages and pitfalls. The debate is a complex one which will not find a definitive resolution without the passing of time to provide quantifiable evidence of the on-going and knock-on effects of legislated gender quotas.

Ashleigh ClowesCo-Head of Diversity Head of Research Senior [email protected]

21

Page 22: Legislated Gender Quotas

INDUCTION

OUR STORYNicoll Curtin Senior Appointments was conceived and developed by Cian Loughnane (Head of Senior Appointments, Co-Head of Diversity), following a central role in the business since 2004.He was tasked with spearheading Nicoll Curtin’s Senior Appointments offering in 2011, in response to client demand for a service that reflected our successes in contingency. He is pas-sionate about Equality and Diversity and its role in the corporate sphere.Cian is ably supported by Ashleigh Clowes (Senior Appointments Researcher and Co-Head of Diversity). Ashleigh takes ownership of research functions, producing tailored research docu-ments on topical issues of interest for clients.

OUR COMMITMENT TO EQUALITY & DIVERSITYWe fully acknowledge that an optimal business environment is a diverse one. We are committed to helping our clients improve their business performance by providing them with the diverse talent required to constitute effective leadership.We will challenge doubts and reinforce the attributes of non-traditional career pathways, broaden-ing your definition of a “successful profile” and providing appropriate weight to intrinsic competen-cies and capabilities. This process is instrumental in facilitating equal opportunities for diverse and talented individuals.Even when this takes the form of a difficult or ‘loaded’ conversation, we will probe, question and challenge often long-held assumptions, revealing unconscious biases that may exist in specifica-tions or selection processes.We will engage candidates in the application process from under-represented characteristic groups by demonstrating your commitment to diversity and your organisation’s mechanisms to help them succeed.

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Cian Loughnane020 7397 [email protected]

Ashleigh Clowes020 7397 [email protected]

Page 23: Legislated Gender Quotas

REFERENCES

1. Alexander, H. (2015). Norway's businesswomen and the boardroom bias debate. The Telegraph. [online] Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/nor-way/9150165/Norways-businesswomen-and-the-boardroom-bias-debate.html [Accessed 17 Feb. 2015].

2. BBC. (2012). EU defends women-on-boards plans. Available: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/busi-ness-20322317. Last accessed 12/12/2015.

3. Deloitte. (2013). Women in the Boardroom: A Global Perspective. Available: http://de-loitte.wsj.com/riskandcompliance/files/2013/05/Women_boardroom.pdf. Last accessed 16/02/15.

4. European Commission of Justice (May 2012) Exchange of good practices on gender equality: Comments paper- Iceland [Online]. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/ex-change_of_good_practice_no/is_comments_paper_no_2012_en.pdf, pg.3.

5. European Commission. (2011). The Quota-instrument: different approaches across Europe. European Commission’s Network to Promote Women in Decision-making in Politics and the Economy, pg.12. Available: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/quota-working_paper_en.pdf. Last accessed 16/02/15.

6. European Commission. (2013). National Factsheet, Gender Balance on Boards: Finland. Avail-able: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/womenon-boards/womenonboards-factsheet-fi_en.pdf. Last accessed 16/02/15.

7. EY. (2014). EY announces 675 new partners worldwide. Available: http://ww-w.ey.com/GL/en/Newsroom/News-releases/news-EY-announces-675-new-partners-worldwide. Last accessed 17/02/15.

8. Fredrik Engelstad. (2012). Limits to State Intervention Into the Private Sector Economy: Aspects of Property Rights in Social Democratic Societies. In: Fredrik Engelstad, Mari Teigen Firms, Boards and Gender Quotas: Comparative Perspectives. UK: Emerald Group Publishing. p. 256.

9. GOV.UK. (2010). Think, Act, Report. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/creat-ing-a-fairer-and-more-equal-society/supporting-pages/think-act-report. Last accessed 17/02/15.

10. GOV.UK. (2014). Case Study - Think, Act, Report: Asda. Available: https://www.gov.uk/govern-ment/case-studies/think-act-report-asda. Last accessed 17/02/15.

11. GOV.UK. (2014). Case Study - Think, Act, Report: Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) Group. Avail-able: https://www.gov.uk/government/case-studies/think-act-report-royal-bank-of-scotland-rbs-group. Last accessed 17/02/15.

12. Great Britain, Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (February 2011) Women on Boards [Online]. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/women-on-boards (accessed: 24/04/14), pg.22.

13. Great Britain, Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (February 2011) Lord Davies Report, Women on Boards [Online]. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/women-on-boards (accessed: 24/04/14), pg.29.

14. Great Britain, Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (March 2014) Women on boards Davies Review Annual Report 2014 [Online]. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/sys-tem/uploads/attachment_data/file/320000/bis-women-on-boards-2014.pdf (accessed: 17/02/15)

23

Page 24: Legislated Gender Quotas

REFERENCES

15. Lee, A. (2014). Gender Quotas Worked in Norway. Why Not Here?. New Republic. [online] Available at: http://www.newrepublic.com/article/119343/impact-quotas-corporate-gender-equality [Accessed 24 Feb. 2015].

16. Lois Joy, Nancy M Carter, Harbey M Wagener, Sriram Narayanan (Catalyst, 2007) The Bottom Line: Corporate Performance and Women’s Representation on Boards [Online]. Available at: http://ww-w.catalyst.org/knowledge/bottom-line-corporate-performance-and-womens-representation-boards> (accessed 24/04/14).

17. Marianne Bertrand, Sandra E. Black, Sissel Jensen, Adriana Lleras-Muney. (2014). Breaking the Glass Ceiling?: The Effect of Board Quotas on Female Labor Market Outcomes in Norway. National Bureau of Economic Research: Working Paper Series. 20256, Available: https://www.utexas.edu/cola/_-files/jd25763/norway_boards_5_2014.pdf. Last Accessed: 17/02/15.

18. McDonald-Gibson, C. (2013). 'The first cracks in the glass ceiling': EU votes to impose legal quotas for women in the boardroom. The Independent. [online] Available at: http://www.independent.-co.uk/news/world/eu-rope/the-first-cracks-in-the-glass-ceiling-eu-votes-to-impose-legal-quotas-for-women-in-the-boardroom-8952718.html [Accessed 24 Feb. 2015].

19. Milne, R. (2009). Skirting the boards. Financial Times. [online] Available at: http://ww-w.ft.com/cms/s/0/6965ce58-5944-11de-80b3-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3S0oYBoy9 [Accessed 17 Feb. 2015].

20. NHO. (2010). Female Future. Available: https://www.nho.no/siteassets/nhos-filer-og-bilder/fil-er-og-dokumenter/female-future/femalefuture-english-web.pdf. Last accessed 16/02/15.

21. Pande, Rohini; Ford, Deanna. 2012. Gender Quotas and Female Leadership. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available: <http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/rpande/files/gender_quotas_-_april_2011.pdf>. Last Accessed: 12/02/15.

22. Paola Profeta, Livia Amidani Aliberti, Alessandra Casarico, Marilisa D'Amico, Anna Puccio. (2014). Directors: The Italian Way and Beyond. UK: Palgrave Macmillan. pg.80.

23. Rohin Pande and D.Ford, (2011). Gender Quotas and Female Leadership: A Review. Back-ground paper for: The World Development Report 2012. Available: http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/r-pande/files/gender_quotas_-_april_2011.pdf. Last accessed 17/02/15.

24. Toomey, C. (2008). Quotas for women on the board: do they work? The Sunday Times. [online] Available at: http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/style/article96924.ece [Accessed 17 Feb. 2015].

24

Page 25: Legislated Gender Quotas

Equality, Diversity &Inclusion Report March 2015