Why is the progress on diversity so slow

What if you wanted to work and were told that some jobs and some roles are out of bounds for you. When you decide to challenge the basis of this denial, you discover that the jobs are denied to you by the law of the land. That is just what women experience in several countries.There are plenty of jobs like mining or in jobs that require lifting weights above a certain threshold or working with glass. You might state that the protection is for their safety.  The law also prohibits women from jobs “involving danger to life, health or morals”. This was the finding of the World Bank Group’s Women, Business and the Law 2016 report.The report, which examines laws that impede women’s employment and entrepreneurship, finds that women face job restrictions in 100 of the 173 economies monitored. For example, women are barred from working in certain factory jobs in 41 economies; in 29 economies they are prohibited from working at night; and in 18 economies they cannot get a job without permission from their husband. Only half of the economies covered have paternity leave, and less than a third have parental leave, limiting men’s ability to share childcare responsibilities. In 30 economies, married women cannot choose where to live and in 19 they are legally obligated to obey their husbands.[i] 

How large is the problem

US has just 15% women in C-suite, only 20% senators or law firm partners. Women surgeons represent only 21% of surgeons. For all those who believe that women are more than adequately represented in the teaching profession, remember that only 24% of full time tenured professors are women.Only 17 out of 195 countries are led by women. Only 4% of Fortune 500 Company CEOs are women. In US only 14% of the Executive Officer positions are held by women. Over the past decade or so the percentage of Board seats has remained stuck at 17%.How are women represented in the Nobel Prize winners list? Just 49 out 825 Nobel Prize winners are women making it barely 6% of the coveted prize going to women. Strictly speaking, these 49 prizes have gone to 48 women. Marie Curie got the prize twice – once for Physics (1903) which she shared with her husband Pierre and Henri Becquerel. She then got it again for Chemistry (1911) where she was the sole recipient. Her daughter Irene shared the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for 1935 with her husband. Thus making the Nobel Prize seem like a family monopoly with five medals between the three of them.Only one-fifth of physics PhDs in US are awarded to women.This is a lost opportunity. The McKinsey Global Institute states that in a full-potential scenario in which women play an identical role in labor markets to men’s, as much as $28 trillion, or 26 percent, could be added to global annual GDP in 2025.

The numbers in India

Women hold 11% of the seats in Parliament. The Companies Act, 2013, prescribes that every listed firm and every public company with a paid-up share capital of Rs 100 crore and above or turnover of Rs 300 crore and above should appoint at least one woman director.[ii] Only 5 of the 100 companies listed had women directors.Only 11 per cent of Indian companies have women as CEOs, but this is several times higher than Fortune 500 companies, according to an EMA Partners study.[iii]

The pay gap will need 80 years to bridge

Women routinely make less money than men. But there has been some progress. The pay gap has closed by less than 3%; progress since the Equal Pay Act in 1975 has been painfully slow, falling from 29% to just over 17%. It could be another 80 years before we achieve pay parity.[iv]The gender pay gap varies across Indian states. Women in Delhi earned 20% less than men, whereas women in Assam earned 64% less than men. In 2011, it was found that women earned Rs72 for every Rs100 earned by men. The good news is that the gap was closing in India.[v]How do we explain this? Is it capability or discrimination or something else? Is it all of the above if one looks at life like a multiple choice question?

Could it be a capability gap?

What does research say about capabilities of women? Can they handle stressful jobs? Research shows that they respond in ways differently from men. Under stressful conditions, women became more attuned to others. Credit Suisse examined almost 2,400 global corporations from 2005 to 2011 — including the years directly preceding and following the financial crisis — and found that large-cap companies with at least one woman on their boards outperformed comparable companies with all-male boards by 26 percent.[vi]If we move away from the organizations and examine the world of cinema where only talent rules it is important to note that 4 out of the top 5 actors are women. While Chris Evans is the most valuable actor in Hollywood, the next four Mila Kunis, Scarlett Johansson, Gwyneth Paltrow and Emma Stone, all women are considered the most valuable actors in Hollywood. This is despite the fact that female actors are paid far less than male actors.[vii]According to a study by USC, of 1,326 content creators surveyed, only two directors and 33 writers were women. If you combine all seven years studied (with the exception of 2011), only 24 female directors have ever worked on a major Hollywood production since 2007. [viii]

Not on the strategic agenda

So why do we not have more women in the leadership roles. Maybe there is a trick we are missing. Every other organization is looking diversity initiatives as a business driver. Yet a Women Matter study showed that gender diversity was a top-ten strategic priority for only 28 percent of companies in 2010—and for a third of companies, it was not on the strategic agenda at all.

We are framing the problem wrong

The solutions to a problem will often be a direct result of the way we have framed the problem. Right now it may be worth examining if the framing of the problem we are trying to solve, is in itself contributing to the slow progress. After all it is hard to solve a problem that has been framed wrong. Diversity initiatives for example have become synonymous with increasing the percentage of women in the workforce. The problem statement currently is: How can organizations craft more female friendly policies?Companies are trying outdo each other by extending the time a woman can be away on Maternity Leave. Flipkart rolled out a maternity benefits package including six months paid leave plus four months of flexible working option with pay. Accenture India extended its maternity leave benefits to five months of paid leave. Intel extended maternity leave benefits to 150 days from 84 days. InMobi launched a maternity policy of four months of paid leave. The government wants to introduce a bill to extend maternity benefits from 12 weeks of paid leave to 26 weeks as a way to substantially improve gender diversity.In doing so the law of unintended consequences may kick in. Since 80% women are employed in small and medium enterprises, this extended maternity benefit may actually result in discouraging companies from employing women in billable, client-facing roles, unless clients and partners also value gender diversity.[ix]

Maybe it is not about gender

Maybe it is time to stop framing diversity as a problem that affects women. Maybe it is not about how to give flexibility to women to let them pursue careers at varying paces depending on their commitments at home.As long as we look at a traditional man-woman couple, the social norms will affect how we view the problem. The man’s role is primarily seen to be that of a breadwinner and the woman is primarily seen to be the caregiver (in majority of the households). If the caregiving role is undervalued we tend to view the career options of the caregiver with different yardsticks. They have to give up their ambitions and aspirations to support the primary breadwinner’s career.Until society tends to value the caregiving role, it is hard for women to pursue a career which they will always be expect to give up to take up the caregiving role.

Change the lens

It may be worth changing the lens to view how a same sex couple would address this issue. Whose career options would get prominence and how would that decision be taken? Who would have to opt for flexi-time options or utilize the work-from-home policy when it came to the crunch? On what basis will these decisions be taken? Maybe we need to use the term diversity to actually view work from such a lens where the common social norms will not apply.We can then extend the argument and ask if such a policy could also apply to singles – men or women. Taking time off from work to attend a child’s school concert is viewed more kindly than a single person wanting to take time off to be with friends or go to the gym. Even in offices which allow for telecommuting, the number of men availing the option is far less than women employees. The unspoken norm is that availing of the flexi-work policy is not viewed kindly for men since they are expected to be primarily in a breadwinner’s role.Maybe it is time to change how we view work itself. How it gets done, when it gets done and by whom.

Change the lens

Greater emphasis on work – life balance – more employees wanting work that fits around their life rather than focusing on a specific career path will have the single biggest impact on the way we work over the next ten years.[x]Gender equality has a huge economic payoff. McKinsey Global Institute estimates the impact to be almost $12 trillion.[xi]As robots take on more and more work that is rule bound the opportunities will grow for roles which need empathy, negotiation skills and collaboration, precisely the skills that women are better at because of their caregiving roles. To make that happen we need a reorganization of the workplace so that people aren’t penalized for choosing flexible schedules by being shunted into positions that are less meaningful to them or less rewarding financially.We need to speed up progress by changing the lens with which we view work. It is not about gender any more.At Wipro, diversity has been defined to have multiple hues. Gender diversity is one of the four pillars of the definition. People with Disability form the other. Socially disadvantaged sections form the third pillar of diversity initiative. The fourth pillar builds focus on improving representation of other nationalities in the workforce. To make the workforce truly inclusive it is important to broaden the lens and identify other minorities to be represented in the workplace. Godrej has tried to build a more inclusive workplace by having specifically calling out LGBT applicants when they go to a campus to hire. That creates the opportunity to create a more inclusive workplace. Simply changing the lens of diversity and broadening the definition turns the focus on to the task to be accomplished and away from who is doing the task.

Diversity is not the problem – inclusion is

Crafting a diverse talent pool is a business imperative. Every organization is aware of the logical arguments that explain why having an inclusive talent policy creates a business advantage. If progress on diversity initiatives has been slow, it is not for want of data and logic to build a compelling proposition. It is the social norms and invisible privileges that have been the barriers.Every time when the pilot of an aircraft welcomes the passengers on board people make a mental note of the gender of the pilot. If that voice belongs to a woman, there are still nervous glances exchanged among passengers and a few jokes cracked about passenger safety being at stake. The problem is not only about expanding the definition of diversity and focusing on the task. Of course we need to replace archaic laws that restrict jobs based on gender. It is as unfair to hold back someone on the basis of any criteria that they have no choice in shaping. The challenge is as much expanding the boundaries of our inner world and becoming aware of our biases and assumptions. The battle is much greater within.------------------Written for National HRD Journal April 2016Join me on Twitter @AbhijitBhaduri-----------------------------------------------------------------REFERENCES[i] http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2015/09/09/despite-progress-laws-restricting-economic-opportunity-for-women-are-widespread-globally-says-wbg-report [ii] http://profit.ndtv.com/news/industries/article-assocham-plans-to-train-3-000-women-directors-over-three-years-384063 [iii] http://ema-partners.com/gender-splits/ [iv] http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/sep/06/comment.economy [v] http://www.paycheck.in/files/gender-pay-gap-oct-2012-1 [vi] http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/19/opinion/sunday/are-women-better-decision-makers.html [vii] http://www.forbes.com/sites/natalierobehmed/2015/12/21/hollywoods-best-actors-for-the-buck-2015-chris-evans-leads-mila-kunis-scarlett-johansson-and-more/ [viii] http://annenberg.usc.edu/pages/~/media/MDSCI/Inequality%20in%20700%20Popular%20Films%208215%20Final%20for%20Posting.ashx [ix] http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/50387124.cms [x] https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/managing-tomorrows-people/future-of-work/assets/pdf/future-of-rork-report-v16-web.pdf [xi] http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/growth/how_advancing_womens_equality_can_add_12_trillion_to_global_growth