T
TALKING HEADS
Sue Unerman
Where are all the men?
T
here’s never been more discussion
and activity around diversity and
inclusion (D&I) in the workplace.
Every week, evermore statistics, stories
and initiatives are swirling around: from
gender pay gap differentials to #MeToo
fallout; from the focus on more diverse
company boards to the prevalence
of company-wide unconscious bias
training, it seems that every company
and organisation has finally grasped that
change needs to happen.
But how much has really changed
on the ground? Not so much. I’m often
invited in by companies to talk about
strategies for improving gender diversity
and, more often than not, there are
only a handful of men present at these
events. Increasingly frequently, and not
unreasonably, a woman delegate will ask:
“Where are all the men?”.
The cynical answer is, in the
boardroom, still making decisions without
most of the women. The statistics for the
proportion of women on boards have
remained slow to change. Although
the latest report on FTSE 100 boards
announces that the proportion of women
has risen to an all-time high of 30%, most
of those appointments are part-time,
non-executive roles.
The number of executive women
directors is still low, and in fact has
dropped slightly since 2016: the
proportion of executive roles held by
women in those top companies is just
2%. This is despite a significant body
of evidence that more diverse boards
and cultures are positive for business
growth and sustainability. The latest
McKinsey diversity report, for example,
found that gender-diverse organisations
outperformed less diverse businesses
by up to 21%.
Currently, too many gender-diversity
initiatives are an echo chamber where
women get together to talk about
change but all too frequently nothing
62 //
Future Talent
gets done. The converted are preaching
to themselves, supporting each other,
maybe influencing to the extent of
starting the discussion – but they are
ultimately failing to make real, practical
progress or to effect long-lasting,
organisation-wide change.
So why aren’t men more actively
engaged in D&I initiatives in
organisations? Usually the answer is
that they feel gender-focused events
are not for them, or they would be taking
spaces intended for women. Or that they
have absolutely no interest in diversity
initiatives, because they see absolutely
nothing in it for them.
Many men do want change, in theory.
But even the most open minded are
often unsure how or what to do. They
have no one to ask. They are unfairly
characterised as ‘the problem’ which
presents them with a zero-sum game,
in which to play is to lose. They need help.
Counter-intuitive as it may seem,
focusing on men to help them
understand the barriers to workplace
diversity, and providing them with some
practical strategies to effect change, is
likely to be more effective than focusing
on women, who already understand all
too well the challenges they face but are less
well-placed to make a difference.
Empowering and enabling women
at work should and must continue.
But this will only take us so far. For
diversity initiatives to flourish, men
currently in power must be encouraged
and supported to effect wider cultural
change. Without the involvement of
everyone in the workplace, diversity
initiatives will not succeed.
We need to get men on board.
Sue Unerman is chief transformation officer
at MediaCom and co-author of The Glass
Wall: Success strategies for women at work
and businesses that mean business.
Robert Rowland Smith
The power of unpredic
T
here are many types of power,
and Donald Trump represents
at least three of them. First,
he had already accumulated a lot of
money before becoming president,
which brings not only purchasing
power but influence. Then, he took
on the power that came with the
office of president of the US, though
it should be noted that the two do
not automatically go together - think
how much power Nixon lost through
Watergate. The third type of power
enjoyed by Donald Trump is perhaps
the most interesting and, unlike the
first two, it is available to us all.
One of Trump’s most egregious
characteristics is that he tends to
shift his position in an unpredictable
and capricious fashion. In 2015, for
example, he began by saying that
“on a humanitarian basis, you have
to” accept Syrian refugees. Two
months later, he said “we cannot
allow them into this country, period.”
The following year he said he
believed in increasing taxes for the
wealthy, only to row back on his