1.

Using the latest data give a comparison of men and women in managerial positions

GLOBALLY

The Percentage of Women in Senior Roles Is Declining Globally. Women hold under a

quarter (24%) of senior roles across the world in 2018, a decrease from 25% in 2017.

However in 2018, 75% of businesses have at least one woman in senior management,

compared to 66% in 2017.On the other hand, one quarter (25%) of global businesses

have no women in senior management roles. The industries most lacking women among

hires for leadership roles in 2017 include manufacturing, energy and mining, software and IT

services, finance, real estate, corporate services, and legal. (International Labour

Organization, 2018)

The G7 is among the worst performing regions, with just 22% of senior roles occupied by

women and 39% of companies with no women in senior roles. Two of the worst performing

individual countries are Japan, with just 7% senior roles held by women, and Germany, with

15%. This is despite widespread public commitments to equal opportunity and an abundance

of research illustrating the commercial benefits of diverse leadership. (International Labour

Organization, 2018)

The “Glass Ceiling” Is Still an Invisible Barrier Preventing Women from Reaching the Top.

Men may still be viewed as default business leaders, affirming the “think manager, think

male” mindset. Senior managers often apply gender stereotypes to leadership—women “take

care,” men “take charge.” In some instances, women face the “glass cliff,” in which they are

appointed to leadership positions in times of economic crisis, limiting their chances of

success. (International Labour Organization, 2018)

AFRICA

In the private sector, Africa has more women in executive committee, CEO, and board roles

in companies than the average worldwide. Numbers vary by industry and region – not

surprisingly – and are much lower in industries that traditionally rely on men for their

workforce (heavy industry, for example). Yet women are still under-represented at every level

of the corporate ladder – non-management and middle and senior management – and fall in

number the higher they climb. Only 5 percent of women make it to the very top. (Deloitte,

2017)

Despite some concrete affirmative action measures, African women are still under-

represented in top decision-making roles in the continent, states a new study by the ILO

Bureau for Employers’ Activities. (International Labour Organization, 2018)

Women increased their share of management jobs during the last decade in six countries –

Botswana, Guinea, Madagascar, Mauritius, Namibia and South Africa – while there was a

slight decline in Ethiopia and a significant decline in Uganda. While there is no clear reason

for the decline in Ethiopia, the significant decline in Uganda is attributed to the decreasing

number of girls attending school.

At executive committee level, African women hold 23 percent of positions, compared with a

global average of 20 percent. At CEO level, they hold 5 percent of positions, compared with

4 percent globally, making Africa the top-performing region alongside the United States

(although this can still be viewed as an unsatisfactory achievement if the pool of senior

executives from which CEOs are typically selected is 23 percent female). At board level,

African women hold 14 percent of seats compared with a global average of 13 percent.

Representation varies considerably, however, across regions and industries within Africa. For
example, in Southern Africa, 20 percent of board positions are held by women, compared to

the 14 percent average on the continent as a whole. In North Africa, the figure is 9 percent.

KENYA

Kenyan women representation in listed companies’ board room has gone up by 75 percent in

the last five years according to the 2017 KIM Leadership and Diversity Research report. The

report shows that the representation now stands at 21 percent up from 12 percent in 2012.

The report identified that only 4 of the 52 listed companies sampled had female chairpersons,

a 7.7 percent representation. This however compares better than the global average of 4

percent. Further, at least 25 percent female board members had a positive influence on

financial performance with a compounded annual growth rate of assets and revenues.

Further, the report revealed that women representation in senior management was a quarter

meaning the 1 woman for every three men in the senior management teams. In fact 4

organizations of the 44 (sampled in this category) had no single woman in the team meaning

that there was no effective women leadership pipeline.

2. Reasons for this disparity

Balancing work and family responsibilities is one of the most challenging obstacles for

women seeking leadership positions. As the most-likely primary or only caregivers for their

children, women often leave the workforce during their peak employment years. They are

more likely than men to work irregularly and spend time out of the workforce, and they are

more likely to work part time, since a woman is seen as the one to take care of the domestic

work and children in the home

Corporate understanding of leadership traits and qualities are inherently masculine and are

similarly difficult to shake. Qualities which are highly sought after in men, such as being

assertive, confident or decisive, tend to be interpreted so differently when applied to women.

These expectations and unconscious bias have contributed to an environment where many

women constantly self-check their behavior. They strive to achieve their best and equal their

counterparts, but need to do so without being labelled “bossy” or “domineering.” Women

may self-monitor their responses to a point where they seem less confident than their male

counterparts—whether seeking an entry level, let alone board position—and hiring managers,

when presented with two equally experienced candidates, may opt for the person who

appears to be more confident, but ultimately, may not be the best person for the job

To understand the limited movement of women into prominent positions of leadership,

concepts such as the “glass ceiling” have come into wide use. The term “Glass ceiling” refers

to the unseen, yet unreachable barrier that restrains women from rising to the upper step of

the corporate ladder, regardless of their qualifications or attainments. The glass ceiling is not

simply a barrier for individual women, but it also applies to women as a group, who are kept

from advancing simply because they are women. (Morrison and Glinow, 1992) Subtle,

indirect obstacles as a result of labeling or stereotyping place stumbling blocks in the career

paths of many women. There are numerous causes of the glass ceiling for women. One

important cause is occupational segregation. The labor market, and especially executive

positions, remain segregated by gender. Women executives are largely concentrated in

specific areas, such as personnel, public relations, and even finance specialties, which seldom

lead to the most powerful top management posts. Many women in positions of leadership

insist that the most important career strategy for advancing to senior levels is to consistently
exceed performance expectations. In other words, for women to move up the corporate

ladder, they must work harder and longer than their male counterparts. A standard excuse

given by the male power structure is that, as a group, women have not moved into the most

powerful positions because there are too few women with the right combination of training,

education, and seasoning. In other words, doors have not been open long enough for women

as a whole within the top leadership.

Another cause, is that the “old-boy network” shuts women out of top management. “An old

boys' network is defined as the informal social network among men that are established and

often powerful in their profession, who also are usually demographically similar, whereby

they support and sponsor each other (Gamba & Kleiner, 2001) this old-boy network consists

of males who have been educated at the same institutions or who have climbed the corporate

ladder together. The “old boys” tend to promote individuals who are like themselves. Men

who are in these top decision-making roles often look to former colleagues and friends to fill

these positions. Women frequently are not even considered when it comes to promotions

because they are outside these networks. Although corporations claim to be meritocracies—

institutions in which advancement up the corporate ladder is based on performance and skill

—the reality is that, despite men and women's similar educational attainments, ambitions,

status, starting salaries, and commitments to their careers, men generally progress faster,

attain higher-status positions, and receive significantly higher compensation than women.

Men's associations with their male peers play a significant role in their rise to power and

prestige. Given that women traditionally have not been an integral force within corporations,

they simply have not developed similar networking systems.

Women executives are being excluded from informal social activities where the groundwork

is laid for corporate advancement. This is a barrier to women in terms of developing rapport

with their colleagues, potential clients, and male bosses. Corporations may further handicap

women by sponsoring explicitly male-only gatherings. These social activities become

ritualized and take on meaning as spaces where positive relationships are created. A

significant consequence of women being excluded from these informal networks of

communication is that women remain “the other,” the “outsider.” Golfing, for instance, has

long been viewed and used as an important tool in developing business relationships. Deals

are advanced on the golf course and sealed in the boardroom. If women are not a part of

these invaluable networking scenarios, they are denied the possibility of climbing the

corporate ladder. Moreover, stumbling blocks remain even if women do join their male

counterparts on the golf courses. Some golf courses are not female friendly; others restrict

times when women can play, based on the assumption that they will slow down the field.

Sex discrimination is a serious obstacle facing women in leadership. Unique barriers that

affect women's ability to shatter the glass ceiling involve career assumptions by management

about women as a group and contradictory expectations for women. Discriminatory attitudes

are often veiled in inaccurate facts about women's capacity for leadership. Women are

presented as not aggressive enough, lacking the self-confidence required for the job, and not

being serious enough about their careers to climb the corporate ladder. But prejudices and

gender stereotypes persist because they allow males to protect their privileged status and

keep women in their place. Despite overwhelming evidence that these stereotypes are wrong,

they persist. Many female executives are convinced that they are not taken seriously by their

male colleagues; many have reported being mistaken for secretaries at business meetings.
While few women in executive positions report serious anti-women attitudes at work, the

forces of discrimination are far more subtle: Women are simply ignored more than men.

Furthermore, female executives are generally paid less than their male counterparts with

similar responsibilities. In higher education, an insignificant number of women fill the

positions of president, chancellor, or provost. Initiatives that must be put in place to rectify

prevailing attitudes toward women include training in gender awareness, diversity, and

combating sexual harassment.

Another barrier to women in leadership is the lack of a critical mass of senior or visibly

successful female role models and mentors. Mentoring is an arrangement whereby an

individual who has experience and knowledge in a particular field can actively guide and

offer support to facilitate the learning or development of another person. The arrangement

generally involves a person in a leadership position providing guidance and assistance to an

individual in a more junior position. While corporations or institutions of higher learning

have recognized the importance and value of mentoring for their employees and have put

formal structures in place to support this process, mentoring generally occurs on an informal

basis. Given the old-boy network that has been central to men's mentoring and advancement,

women traditionally have had fewer mentoring opportunities open to them than their male

colleagues. Women in executive positions stress that the lack of mentoring among women

has been detrimental to their climb up the corporate ladder. Because men generally occupy

the highest positions of leadership, men are more likely to be in powerful positions to open

doors for those with inferior status. This is a serious barrier to women's advancement.

The costs of consistently outperforming men and the lack of rewards in the race to the top are

simply too high for many women who are within reach of executive positions. For this
reason, women-owned businesses are growing dramatically both in number and in economic

viability. Women are leaving the corporate world and are drawn instead to business

ownership because it allows for greater control over their time, productivity, and

advancement. As a result, corporations are under pressure to find ways to retain their most

talented women. Given the barriers to women's advancement, theorists are questioning the

very structures of leadership dominant in society.

There are more women pursuing higher education than men, but the number who finish is

low, or they take a longer time to finish thus leading to less qualified women than men. This

is responsible for the gender differences in the workforce. Differential access to educational

and training opportunities have also led to low proportions of women in the formal sector and

their concentration in low paid production jobs with limited career prospects.

3. Ways of addressing this disparity

Developing creative solutions to workday job design can help women have a work-life

balance and prevent them from quitting so as to take care of their families. This can be done

through having flexible working hours instead of the traditional 8-5 jobs. Other flexible work

plans can include a work from home option.

Tracking key metrics so as to understand the problem in the gender disparity is important. It

is hard to change what is not measured. Organizations need to understand their performance

metrics (“hard” pipeline data) and health metrics (“soft” cultural/attitudinal data) to know

what is working and where they can improve. It is also important that they track key metrics

over time to see trends and assess program effectiveness. Some of the metrics include:
 i. Employee pipeline-this includes number of women and men at all stages in the hiring

process: sourcing, resume screening, interviews, offers, and acceptances. It also includes

number of women and men hired (both new and lateral hires)
ii. Performance reviews and internal promotions- involves looking at promotion rates for

women and men, promotion rates for staff and line roles performance ratings for women and

men, allocation of stretch and high-visibility assignments

iii. Compensation- Compare compensation across women and men in similar levels and roles
iv. Attrition- looking at number of women and men leaving at all levels and why

Making gender diversity a top board and CEO priority can also help. Senior leaders should

develop and enforce a cohesive gender diversity transformation strategy, own the

communication about this transformation, monitor progress and lead the change. To make

headway, companies need to invest time and money in gender diversity. Executives can set

the tone by participating in women’s events and publicly sponsoring high-potential women..

In addition, anchoring gender diversity strategies in a compelling business case should be

key. This can be done by Communicating the business case simply and clearly so that

employees understand how to link their individual interests to the success of a gender

diversity transformation program.

There should be a fair system of evaluation. One study found that replacing a woman’s name

with a man’s name on a résumé increased the likelihood of getting hired by 61 percent. In the

workplace, men’s performance is frequently overestimated while a woman’s performance is

undervalued. This discrepancy may, in part, explain why women are promoted based on past

accomplishments, but men are promoted based on potential. In both hiring decisions and

performance evaluations, it is essential to be as gender-blind as possible and stay aware of

existing biases. Holding managers accountable for their hiring decisions and evaluations is

also a good way to encourage thoughtful decision making.

Creating and formalizing development programs that are tailored to increasing women’s

mobility into leadership positions is a necessary step to close the gender gap. Women should

be encouraged to take online classes which are flexible and the qualifications can help them

get promotions. In addition, leadership trainings tailored for women should be key.

Devoting both male and female mentors and sponsors to women at every stage of the talent

pipeline will help facilitate that mobility; frequently, it is only senior-level women mentoring

other women, placing an unfair burden on those sponsors and limiting their guidance.

Because men currently hold the vast majority of the top-level roles, male leaders need to

bring promising female professionals along. And because people tend to both mentor and

sponsor in their own image, often unconsciously because these are typically unofficial roles,

it is essential to make male leaders more cognizant of this important responsibility and

encourage them to widen their circle to include women. As the trajectory of women leaders

improves at every level of the organization, more senior women will be able to serve as role

models and sponsors and help raise their more junior female colleagues through the ranks to

leadership.

On a micro level, equally distributing office tasks such as note-taking, organization, and

training will level time spent away from primary tasks, as well as participation at work. In

one study that looked at performance evaluations, men who stayed late to help prepare a

meeting were rated 14 percent more favorably than women who did the same. Meanwhile,

women were rated 12 percent lower than men when both failed to help prepare. It’s important

to learn and adopt strategies that increase stay awareness of these biases.
Developing systems to help employees manage stress and ending the 24/7 work schedule will

incentivize the best workers and especially women to seek management jobs. A survey by the

United Nations revealed that 67 percent of women and 86 percent of American men work

more than 40 hours per week, yet an incredible 41 percent of American workers did not take

a single day off in 2015. 55 percent of women and 50 percent of men cite stress as the

primary reason for not pursuing a senior-level position.

Most importantly, educate yourself and current employees regarding unconscious biases.

Knowing that women are less likely to attribute success to personal skill, for example, and

more likely to ascribe failure to lack of ability, while men will do just the opposite, can

encourage you to actively and publicly acknowledge a female employee’s success. When a

woman is successful, she is more likely to be viewed negatively by her peers, whereas a

man’s success increases his “likeability.” A Harvard Business School study found that people

assume women would choose family and motherhood over work and would therefore not be

suitable for the job. Similarly, senior female partners are viewed as both bad managers and

bad mothers when they prioritized work over family. And most importantly, success will

happen when these ideas are socialized within the organization.

Media can be an important tool of dealing with this disparity. Initiatives e.g. top 40 under 40

showcases young women under 40 yeas causing ripples in their respective fields. This helps

promote the narrative that women can make excellent leaders given the opportunity.
REFERENCES

Catalyst, Pyramid: Women in S&P 500 Companies (June 1, 2018).

Deloitte, (2017) Women in the Boardroom: A Global Perspective—Fifth Edition
Grant Thornton, (2018) Women in Business: Beyond Policy to Progress
International Labour Organization, (2018) World Employment Social Outlook: Trends for

Women 2018: Global Snapshot