The Glass Ceiling getting stronger.

http://detnews.com/article/20111020/OPINION03/110200388/Berman--Glass-ceiling-regains-strength

In this article, the bottom line is that to this day, women are still considered a risky business investment.  With the turbulent economy and poor job market a rise in conservatism has been evident.  One of the most telling facts of this is the statistic about how in 2003 38% of companies in the automotive, technology, and life sciences and services industries had no women on their boards.  As of last week, that number is up to 64% of those companies have no women on the board.

The argument for getting more women on the board is the evidence that diversity in the board tens to add to the bottom line.  Unfortunately, while research shows that diversity in leadership leads to higher profits there is still a large deficiency in women being placed in those leadership roles.  This is clear evidence of uncertainty overriding good judgement.  Especially when evidence suggests that a diverse board is far better for improving the bottom line.  Also, an improved bottom line is better for companies as it allows them further funds to grow and expand in ways that would be beneficial to the longevity of the company. 

It is sad to see that in times of economic turmoil, people will tend to revert to methods they're more comfortable with even though it may not be the best thing for everyone.  What needs to happen is for the women who are in those positions of power to start pointing out all the benefits of a diverse leadership group in the different organizations.  This lack of unified leadership among women is likely what is holding them back as equal members of the top rung on the corporate ladder.  Once an organized group forms and starts to push the research and information about the benefits of a diverse board and executive pool then and only then will people stop viewing the promotion of women to top ranking positions as a "risk".

-Geoffrey Ali

Women Still Missing From Top Jobs

http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/mar2010/gb2010039_514157.htm

The World Economic Forum (WEF) published a report criticizing companies around the world for lacking women in the workforce. In the UK the prime minister comments that it is "unacceptable" that some companies in the UK have no women represented on their boards. He also states that the UK might have to take legal action to correct this problem. Even worse out of the 200 companies researched in this study (spanning over 20 countries) less than 5% had women chief executives. Also, the pay gap between men and women has not gotten any smaller. At an average of 18% difference in pay, and up to 40% difference in pay in senior level positions, women are grossly being under payed. Also, the WEF said that 72% of the companies surveyed did not even track the difference in men and women's pay. 

These statistics are appalling. Companies in America and all around the world claim they are making progress, or even that women and men are on an even playing field. If this were true more women would occupy senior level positions, the pay difference would be smaller, and more companies would be aware of these issues.

Most women are concentrated in entry and middle-level jobs and remain limited in senior level positions all over the world and in every industry, with the exception of Norway. Norway has over 40% women occupying board positions, due to regulation. This is a testament that government regulation would help women get those senior level positions. 

The article states that more than half of all graduates are women, this being said, companies are missing out on a huge talent pool. Also, looking at this issue from a staffing perspective the workforce does not represent the customer base, which may have adverse impact on business for companies. 

I believe business's around the world need to recognize the huge opportunity that women offer. That is, the opportunity to maximize knowledge in the workforce, and maximize profitability. I also think that government needs to take a more active role in allowing women to get those senior level positions. 

Shattering Glass Ceilings: Wal-Mart and Novartis Lawsuits

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2010/06/15/shattering-glass-ceilings.html

This article talks about the Equal Pay Act that was supposed to end gender discrimination in the workplace. This has obviously not ended gender biases; women continue to earn 77 cents for every dollar men earn on the job. This article talks about the lawsuits filed against Novartis pharmaceutical company.  This company had been listed as one of the top 100 companies to work by Working Mother magazine. Novartis had discriminated against its female employees in pay and promotions for at least five years, from 2002-2007. This company was very discriminatory against women due to their motherhood duties. The examples mentioned in this article sadden me that things like this happen in the workplace in the United States.

As mentioned in Chapter 13 in our textbook Leadership, there are a number of reasons on why to remove barriers of ethnics, racial minorities, and women discrimination in the workplace. First, this allows an opportunity for everyone to have equal opportunity in taking on any leadership role. Second, this increases the pool of potential candidates and makes it possible to find the most qualified person for the job. Third, this makes businesses and government more representative. Next, more diversity increases productivity. Last, research has shown that women in leadership roles have increased financial performance (NorthHouse 306). These are some of the many reasons why to focus on decreasing and ultimately eliminating biases in the workplace.  Are there any reasons to eliminate biases in the workplace that you can think of, Thoughts?

Back in 1940, Eleanor Roosevelt said, “In government, in business, and in professions there may be a day when women will be looked upon as persons. We are, however, far from that day as yet.” We have certainly made steps in the right direction to recognize women as a knowledgeable, educated individual. These steps are shown through the Equal Pay Act, more and more women having careers beyond being a stay at home mother, nearly 60% of women earn bachelors and masters degrees, etc. Even though we as a nation have made progress there is still much discrimination based on pay and point blank racism in many organizations in business.  The factors that support discrimination are women receive less education, become mothers, less work experience, and have fewer development opportunities (NorthHouse 304). Regardless if you receive this information as true or false, it is just unfair to all the smart females in this country that are not taken serious by employers. As women face a “glass ceiling”, men appear to have a “glass escalator” in their way to the top. It is an extreme challenge for women to overcome all of these obscene barriers.

Stereotypes affect the way employers look at women. Women are viewed as having the characteristics of concern for others, sensitivity, warmth, helpfulness, and nurturing.  As men are viewed with the characteristics of confidence, assertiveness, independence, rationality, and decisiveness. Many of the characteristics that are looked for when promoting someone are those that men typically have. Employers should never stereotype by sex or any other way because each person has their own characteristics, but if fair or not this is what happens in many organizations.  Women can try to overcome this stereotype by adapting a transformational style of leadership. This leadership style helps females maintain their femininity while adapting attributes of power, assertiveness, confidence etc (NorthHouse 311). Is there another style of leadership that women can use to increase their chances of becoming noticed by employers? Or other traits or behaviors they can adopt?

A question that arises in this article is discrimination is illegal so why does it persist? The reasons that are mentioned are it is more cost effective and lack of knowledge of the salary difference between genders. I believe that discrimination still persists due to there will always be people in an organization that are discriminatory against a certain race, gender, ethnicity, etc.  Discrimination will never completely go away due to certain individuals that break the rule of ethics. I believe discrimination is a question of ethics. Morally this issue is wrong and should not be a practice in organizations such as Novartis. Does anyone else have an opinion about why discrimination is such a problem in companies such as; Wal-Mart and Novartis pharmaceutical?

-Mitchell Terry

Ways Women Stunt Their Careers Unintentionally

Ways Women Stunt Their Careers Unintentionally

This article talks about ways that women compare to men in their self-confidence in the work place. It is no surprise that women tend to have lower self-esteem, but showing a connection between that and the work place never occurred to me. The study narrowed it down to 4 main problems that women find themselves in, in the workplace. These 4 categories are being overly modest, not asking, blending in, and remaining silent. These categories include things like not asking for promotions, not showing their accomplishments, not speaking up in the board room and overall not standing out.

All of these things made me think of the small debate we had in class over authentic leadership. A lot of the characteristics talked about in the article regarded being modest. If you are authentically a modest person, and don't like being in the spotlight for your accomplishments it could be seen as a great personality trait. However, in the work place its not a good thing, because you don't get recognized for your work and it can go unnoticed by not only your boss, but by your coworkers as well. This could be a very definite reason a lot of women can't seem to break the glass ceiling. Could this also be a downfall in authentic leadership or no, because if they are modest they will never truly be leaders?

This article also made me ponder complexity theory. Considering there is never a true leader with this theory do you think it could just be a lot of modest leaders that never come out of the woodwork and take credit? I mean someone has to be behind those movements, or is it really a self organizing system?

Overall, do you guys think that a modest women could be a leader or must it take confidence? This clearly goes back to the trait theory in chapter 2. Does it take certain traits to be a leader or can a modest leader that has fantastic accomplishments rise to power and break the glass ceiling?

-Danielle Sparacino