The Glass Cliff

Historically, successful women in organizations have had to worry about the glass ceiling, which as you know by now, is the invisible barrier that keeps them from ascending to the top of their organization.  Well, ladies, I have some bad news.  Not only does the glass ceiling still exist, but now you've got to worry about the glass cliff as well. 

What's the glass cliff you say?  That's the question that Michelle Ryan and Alex Haslam from University of Exeter address in a Harvard Business Review article from January of 2011.  What the researchers discovered was that women have a better chance of breaking through the glass ceiling when their organization faces a crisis.  Therefore, the women find themselves on the glass cliff, presumedly this is due to the nature of taking a senior leadership role during a crisis situation and facing the steep decline in success does not follow their appointment. 

To test their theory the researchers asked college students to read articles about a company with a retiring CEO.  There were multiple sets of articles in which leadership was historically men or women and also the company was doing well or poorly financially. 

What they found was that regardless of historical leadeship gender, participants preferred a male leader when the company was performing well and a female leader when the company was performing poorly.  So the real question is...why? 

One thought is that a company in peril needs to be run more delicately than a company hitting on all cylinders.  That is to say that participants may have felt that a woman's intuition and caring nature may lead to better leadership during crisis when employees will be concerned about their jobs and characteristics typically associated with women go further than thost associated with men. 

Perhaps the respondants thought about when they were younger and in the worst of times they could turn to their mother for the right answers.  I dont' really know the why, but the what is that women seem to be viewed as better leaders in times of crisis, but not in times of calm. 

Glass ceiling, glass cliff maybe there will be a glass elevator someday, but for now it seems that women are either stuck to the ceiling or left teetering on the edge.

Adam Porth
http://hbr.org/2011/01/how-women-end-up-on-the-glass-cliff/ar/pr

When Glass Ceiling Helps

Is Glass Ceiling always bad? This statement cannot be completely denied. According to a recent study, glass ceiling works from negative to positive as women move from below it to above it. From ages, women have been struggling and working hard to get into top management roles, working their way out of all obstacles to get into better and challenging roles. Once they overcome these barriers and reach a top notch position, they are perceived as better leaders then men at the same level, as a mark of extra perseverance, courage, and ability. On this side of glass ceiling, when women climb up the ladder to be in a leadership role, people perceive that these women might have worked twice as hard as the men at the same level, so once they get there, people think, ‘They are phenomenal’.

Lot of research has been done to understand women at lower and middle management level, but very little has been done to examine how women at the pinnacle of the organization are perceived. An interesting research, says that women at lower levels are either perceived as caring or competent, but not both. Lower level female employees are perceived to be communal but not competitive, while successful women at middle management are perceived as competent and not communal. Contrary to this view, women at top level are perceived to be caring as well as competent. Amazingly, people do not see these two things viz. caring and competent nature as mutually exclusive in women at top notch management roles. There could be many possible reasons. One of the reasons could be the competition. It may be one of the reasons that middle managers have other managers as competitors; this competition naturally highlights the competence and unfriendly aspects to other. However, when women reach top management level they have less competition and people get to see the other side of them. For instance, Hillary Clinton was seen as the toughest and unfriendly person when she was engaged in highly competitive presidential campaign, but when she occupied the position of secretary of state, she was seen as caring as well as communal. She was not only able to get her job done, but was also able to connect with many diverse groups of people.

Most of the women are perceived to be born with competent as well as communal qualities; they are seen as collectivist and feminist in approach. It could also be Galatea effect that helps women to perform better. As an ideal leader is seen to be participative, collaborative, willing to listen to their followers, and value their opinions. It is mix of these qualities due to which people perceive women as better leaders than men at top notch position. But, perceptions are just the initial thoughts or impressions that we form about people and tend to be stable and salient to contrary information.

Reference-

http://blogs.hbr.org/research/2010/10/when-the-glass-ceiling-helps.html

Sarita Sharma

The Glass Ceiling is Thicker for Women……..

I agree that personality affects a person’s effectiveness and that those who don’t have agentic qualities will likely not experience as much success as people who do.  Statistics also show that women who don’t demonstrate agentic qualities will succeed even less.  This is due to a factor known as the glass ceiling –as we know it is a professional gender barrier that most women face in their quest for success.    Let’s take a look at some relevant data:

Women make up…..

·         46.7% of the workforce

·         37% of lower and mid-level management

·         26% of senior level management/VPs

·         2% of Fortune 500 CEOs

As we progress to the top of leadership within organizations, the percentage of women who fill leadership positions dramatically decreases.  As mentioned in my "Equality for Women in the Workplace - Who is Responsible” post, some countries have implemented policies to address this.  In an attempt to solve the issue, there is a possibility, however that we are overlooking less costly actions that could be taken to increase the number of women in senior leadership positions.

Statistics show that businesses typically experience competitive advantages by having women involved at the highest level of decision making and management –(higher profit, better share price growth, higher quality earnings, better decisions and better innovation.  For this reason, organizations should consider ways to integrate women in their boards and senior leadership teams.  So, what can they do to address the issue of women being stuck in lower levels within organizations?  Here are a few ideas….

·         Increase sponsorship of women: match promising women within the organization with senior leaders who will “market” the women.

·         Support career development: rotate women through the organization and provide leadership training

·         Recruit qualified women: In the US, there are more women than men in college.  Qualified women can be found to fill positions; some may just need to be pursued.

While businesses have a responsibility to reduce the effects of the glass ceiling, women themselves also need to play a role by assertively communicating their career aspirations.  They need to appreciate the value of mentorship and sponsorship and seek sponsors who will be their loud, vocal “cheerleaders” in the workplace. 

In addition to greater assertiveness, women who want to rise to the highest levels within the business community may have to align their personal lives to support that growth.  Unfortunately in many households, women are they primary care takers.  Due to this, women who want to shatter the glass ceiling may also have to make an important decision: pursue career aspirations or start a family.  

Does anyone have any other suggestions or ideas for women who will likely meet the barrier in their career called the glass ceiling?

-Jessica Brown

http://blogs.wsj.com/ideas-market/2011/04/07/where-are-all-the-women/?KEYWORDS=breaking+the+glass+ceiling

http://blogs.forbes.com/prettyyoungprofessional/2011/05/04/ladies-who-lead-a-wsj-closer-look-at-women-in-the-economy/

The healthiest economy is one that uses its human resources most efficiently

One of the non-controversial statements that I have read recently is “The healthiest economy is one that uses its human resources most efficiently”.

Lack of women on the corporate board is definitely a symptom for lack of diversity. This means that we are not using our human resources very efficiently. Britain is also inching towards following other countries like France, Spain and Norway in introducing compulsory quotas for women in corporate boards. Some of the basic gender based problems are earning gaps and glass ceiling. This step will at least answer the gender problems and bring in equality. The main problem for the organizations though, is not just about having women in their board, but about having a diverse voice. 

Most of the boards essentially have multiple CEO voices, rather than voices that represent different points of view and perspectives. Most of the people on the board have been brought up in the culture of large corporations and have spent their life creating shareholder financial value. Due to the structure of the organization, many critical issues are not even raised and discussed. Due to group think in the board, it is also very easy to miss out on some major problems.

By having a better diversity, the organization would benefit by higher quality and creative decision making. The diverse group would bring in different opinions and ideas which would help the organization consider more alternatives and think out of the box. The next advantage that organizations experience with diversity is better understanding of customers. We can understand our customers better if we have one of those target audience in the board. This is very much possible when we have a diverse group of board members. Organization will have a more satisfied work force when the employees are being treated fairly, which will eventually result in a better organization performance.  

Organizations should encourage openness and increase the diversity in the work force from top to bottom of the organization. One of the best ways to break the barrier that the Europeans found was to make it mandate to have a certain percentage for women board members. Another idea is presented in the article, which discusses the option of having true elections for board members which would make it possible for candidates from different backgrounds appear in the board. I think that along with these different ideas, it is also very important to build a culture of respecting diversity, have some diversity training programs, and check the recruitment process. Building a culture of respecting diversity is very important as it enables employees with different demographics and back grounds to feel a sense of belonging. Taking these steps will help the organizations manage their diversity issues better. If the organizations do not give importance to managing diversity, I am afraid they will not thrive in the long run.

Reference

http://blogs.forbes.com/edwardlawler/2011/05/16/lack-of-women-on-corporate-boards-the-problem-or-a-symptom/

Krishna Garimella

The Glass Ceiling: Not just for women anymore!

Odds are if you're reading this blog, you're familiar with the term "glass ceiling".  Also, most readers would associate the glass ceiling with women in the workplace.  However, a recent article in Harvard Business Review, written by Andrew O'Connell says that the glass ceiling may have less to do with gender than historically thought. 

A team led by Mark C. Frame of Middile Tennessee State University analyzed data from more than 14,000 people (both men and women) and found that "the higher you go on the corporate ladder, the more you're among people who put a lot of stock in assertiveness and independance."  These qualities are called "agentic" qualities, opposed to "communal" qualities like caring about other's feelings. 

Basically, the nicer you are the less likely you are to be promoted, regardless of your gender.  While this may be somewhat of a relief to women in organizations who aspire to ascend the corporate ladder, this is disturbing in the sense that the study is saying that to be leaders, we need to focus more on ourselves and  less on our peers and followers.  Now that last sentence may be overblown as Frame's team goes on to say that "success and upward mobility in corporate environments may require more task focused behaviors."  Now that's not so bad, however, O'Connell goes on to add that the glass ceiling, "may block anyone who places great importance on selflessness or concern for others." 

So what's a sensitive caring guy supposed to do?  Well, essentially, they may need to play a role within the organization, bringing out the agentic qualities when needed.  This may lead to a large amount of stress however when acting outisde of your true personality.  For that reason, Frame says that communal managers would be best suited to have a network of friends or family to express their communal side outside of work. 

So, the moral of this story is that, to get ahead, you've got to put yourself first.  This seems to fly in the face of what we were taught as kids and to some extent in business school.  Also, if you can't naturally put yourself first...pretend you can.  While this does explain how a former boss of mine has climbed so high, it certainly doesn't speak well for the future of organizations as the markets shift into a dynamic that not just desires, but expects high levels of customer service. 

Wrapping up, good news for women because the glass ceiling may have been broken for you, but bad news for everyone if the only way to climb the corporate ladder is to not worry about how many faces you step on in the process.

-Adam Porth

Equality for women in the workplace - who is responsible?

As a society, many of us expect organizations to be socially responsible, green, philanthropic, etc.  When dissecting the make-up of an organization and its ability to achieve these things, it’s also important to keep in mind that the first goal of an organization (excluding non-profits) is to make money.  Successful organizations find a good balance between bottom-line profit and re-investment in the organization and communities through social responsibility and stewardship.  Many even have the mission of achieving a triple-bottom line.  Successful organizations also carefully maintain a continual focus on becoming stronger organizations. 

One aspect of organizational make-up that can greatly affect the strength of an organization is the on-going inequality of women versus men in the workplace.  The following statistics support the fact that there is indeed still inequality between men and women:

o   Board Member Make-up:

§  In the US, for Fortune 500 companies, 15% of board members are women

§  In the UK, 12.5% of board members are women

§  In Asia, the number of women on boards is in single digits

o   Pay Gaps: 

§  17% difference in the UK

§   15% in the European Union

§  23% in the US

Women who have an appropriate education level, experience and leadership skills are still encountering a “glass ceiling” that is difficult to penetrate.  Women are aware of this glass ceiling; 75% of women believe there are barriers to them reaching senior management whereas only 38% of men feel the same way.  The glass ceiling can create inequity for women who can’t penetrate the barriers for higher salaries and more prestigious positions.  Each of us strives for balance; as a result, women may be de-motivated in organizations with glass ceilings.

So inequality exists, but what historically has been done about it?  Some countries have tried to “force” organizations to decrease the inequality of women.  For example, Norway implemented quota that requires that a board must consist of 40% women for publicly traded companies.  If companies do not comply with this law, they are threatened with termination of the organization.  Organizations who do not want to comply, in the past, however, have taken their companies private or moved their headquarters to the United Kingdom.

France has also implemented a policy to increase the percentage of women on company boards.   The penalty for not complying compared to Norway’s law, however is much less severe.  Germany also enforced a “Self Commitment” requirement for organizations about 10 years ago.  The requirement consisted of organizations committing to hiring and maintaining higher percentages of women on their boards.  Ten years after this was enacted, the German DAX30 is only comprised of 2.2% women board members.

Obviously some of these policies aren’t working, but the research firms Catalyst and McKinsey and Company have found that having women on boards has shown to bring higher profit, better share price growth, higher quality earnings, better decisions and better innovation within organizations.  In addition, diversity in general results in higher creativity in decision-making, better understanding and service of customers, more satisfied workforce, higher stock process and lower litigation expenses.

Aforementioned, organizations exist to make money; so as organizations see other organizations with leadership teams comprised of a roughly equal number of men and women do well, could this drive them to also change their leadership teams to include more women? Also, if this starts happening, could the policies that haven’t worked in the past become more powerful similar to policies regarding race have in the past?  I think a powerful question regarding this issue is - will these policies help businesses make money?  The answer to this question should determine the type of policies (if any) that should be implemented to address the issue.

References:

http://blogs.forbes.com/sashagalbraith/2011/02/25/women-quotas-will-it-break-the-plexi-glass-ceiling/
Who gets the carrot and who gets the stick? Evidence of gender disparities in executive remuneration. Kulich, Clara; Trojanowski, Grzegorz; Ryan, Michelle K.; Alexander Haslam, S.; Renneboog, Luc D. R.. Strategic Management Journal, Mar2011, Vol. 32 Issue 3, p301-321, 21p; Retrived from Business Source Premier (Milner Library); Accession Number 57096249

-Jessica Brown

Learn to embrace the tension of diversity

Are spices always bad? Definitely not, if mixed in the right quantity makes a delicious cuisine. It is the peculiarity of each individual spice that adds up to make cuisine delightful for the taste buds. Similar is the case with diversity at workplace where differences and similarities amongst the employees from different cultural backgrounds if used at the right place will make an organization victorious. As the businesses go global, people from different parts of the world with different values, culture, age, race, religions come together to serve the common purpose of economic growth. As stated in the article, differences in perceptions, opinions, and competencies can be an asset for the organization, but managing diversity can be a challenging. Due to similarity attraction phenomenon, there are communication gaps, interpersonal conflicts, and lack of cohesiveness among the team members slowing down the decision making process.

In today’s highly competitive scenario, it is vitally important for organizations to hire leaders who can effectively handle the diversity tension and benefit from the advantages of diversity. It is critical for the leaders to respect the diversity and to build cultural intelligence. Making continuous efforts in the direction of understanding the dynamics of diversity through historical, political and economic references and in learning different working style will enable a leader to effectively utilize diverse talents and competencies in the right place. Not only should the leader encourage training programs explaining diversity differences and inculcating respect for different cultures in team, but also work on minimizing differences among his team members.

A leader should develop a work environment where people are welcomed for giving valuable ideas and opinions while giving time and opportunity to understand each other’s cultural differences. This would help in developing a well-rounded team, whose benefits will outnumber the efforts made to put them together as a team. With diverse people brainstorming together for more creative and innovative ideas, organizations would benefit from better problem solving and organization flexibility.  By avoiding ethnocentrism, a leader can use rich diversity of culture and thought around the world as one of the greatest resources to face the competition and bring positive change in corporations.

Reference-

http://blogs.hbr.org/goldsmith/2010/06/learn_to_embrace_the_tension_o.html

Sarita Sharma

Impact of Diversity on Amazon and Wal-Mart !!

I have read an article about how Amazon is expected to outgrow Wal-Mart. It is interesting to see how Amazon has benefited by overcoming their bias towards traditional practices and giving importance to diversity and how Wal-Mart has suffered with low growth and lawsuits due to their organization’s culture.

The growth of Amazon has been extraordinary in the recent years. Currently, Amazon has been busy with many projects, exploring new areas and participating in the market shift looking for all possible opportunities. Amazon has realized early that dynamic markets require diversity in approach, vision and thinking, and have overcome their bias which was critical for their success. Amazon has increased its employment by 45% last year and has transformed into more than an online book retailer.

With the information available in this article, it is clearly evident that diversity in the company’s culture, vision, approach and thinking has been an important part of Amazon’s success story. Diversity helps Organizations benefit with higher creativity in decision making, better understanding and service to customers, more satisfied workforce, higher stock prices, lower litigation expenses and all together a improved company performance. Amazon has clearly experienced these benefits as mentioned in detail in the article. 

On the other side we have Wal-Mart which has been experiencing low growth. Wal-Mart has recently faced a lawsuit from former female workers. This lawsuit was regarding the company’s discrimination against female workers and how it awarded compensations and promotions. It is also learnt that the company’s culture has a big influence on managers’ decisions.

I would not say that Wal-Mart has been losing on their growth only because of their diversity issues. But looking at their problems like stagnation of growth and lawsuits regarding gender differences, earning gaps and glass ceiling, it is directly indicating that there are a lot of diversity issues which need to be addressed.  Looking at how organizations are benefited from being diverse, Wal-Mart has to use this lawsuit as a wakeup call and start looking at being open to diversity in all aspects of their business. 

Reference:

http://blogs.forbes.com/adamhartung/2011/04/26/why-amazon-out-grows-wal-mart-overcoming-bias/

Krishna Garimella 

Introduction

Welcome!! Shattering the glass ceiling was a popular term  used in organizations during the 1980s referring to the invisible barriers for women in the work force. Today, however, it means something more than just the barriers for women and extends to diversity in general. One of the most important tasks for any organization today is to effectively manage diversity issues.

This blog is created by Jessica Brown, Krishna Garimella, Adam Porth and Sarita Sharma to bring to light some of the recent examples of how organizations are managing their diversity issues.  It will include valuable discussions comparing real practice with the theories and concepts of Organizational Behavior. We invite you to join in our discussions and share your valuable insights.