This September is the 20th anniversary of a speech made by former US Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton. In the speech, Clinton made the famous remark, “Women’s rights are human rights”. Since the speech, focus on gender equality has increased, especially in the workplace. Yet, some industries, like private equity, continue to have problem in attracting women.
Private equity firms have become increasingly aware of the need to get more women involved. But how big is the problem and are new perks the way to go?
Women in Private Equity
Preqin’s latest research in March didn’t paint a very rosy picture. The research showed that private equity industry as a whole has a woman in charge of just 11.7% of leadership positions.
In terms of different sectors within the industry, buyout firms are doing the worst. Only 10.5% of senior positions have a woman in charge, while the proportion is 14.0% in infrastructure, for example. Furthermore, in small private equity firms the situation tends to be worse. Women make only 9.7% of senior positions in firms with five or fewer such senior employees. In large firms, firms with over 20 high-level management positions, 13.9% of senior positions are held by women.
The more positive news was that the situation is changing. Venture capital firms, for example, managed to increase the share of female senior employees from just 11.2% in 2013 to 14.8% in 2015. In fact, proportion of women in senior positions has increased across sectors.
In
"In 1950 about one in three women participated in the labor force. By 1998, nearly three of every five women of working age were in the labor force" (Heatherfield, n.d., para. 4). In 2008, the U.S. Department of labor estimates that women will make up 48% of the workforce (Heatherfield, n.d., para. 6). As the number of women in the workforce rises so do the numbers of women who hold higher titles such as Chairman, CEO, Vice Chairman, President, Chief Operating Officer, Senior Vice President, and Executive Vice President. This number has increased from 7.3% in 2000 to 9.9% in 2002 (Diversity statistics, 2006).
In today's world women are perceived in the workforce as either less qualified or arrogant uptight. "Approximately 40 percent of students in elite business schools are female, and it is particularly difficult for them to move up the career ladder. A study by the nonprofit organization Catalyst in 60 U.S. top companies indicates that among 500 directors there is not a single woman" (Sinitsa). From an article "Man's world refuses to take women seriously, even in 21st century" we are shown that more than Half of the female talent is are wasted. To allow the female population to grow will be beneficial that will slow the society to grow an advance. Women can be a perfect candidate in the workforce just as well as any
Why are there not more women in the upper ranks of corporate America? Is it because women slow down or stop career plans to spend more time caring for family? Or possibly because they are just less ambitious than men and don’t have the confidence? Simple answer: No. Something else is occurring whilst on their way to the top. Women are not surrendering their vocations in huge numbers. Parenthood actually builds their craving for winning advancements; and women by large don 't lack of aspiration or certainty that they can use to go up against difficult tasks. Yet when asked whether they want a top role in their companies or industries, a majority of women say they would rather not grab the brass ring.
Females make up only 6% of highly paid executives of Fortune 500 companies. Even with the
Although in 2012, only 18 women served as CEOs of Fortune 500 companies. Furthermore, in a recent report, women only held 16.6% of board seats in 2012 in the fortune 500 companies (Aguilar). Women are somehow being held back from achieving their higher potential, and is is not due to lack of education. The department of education found that “140 women will graduate with a college degree at some level this year for every 100 men”(Aguilar). Most people believe the reason is because of the phenomenon of the “glass ceiling”. Many large companies do not hire women for the upper level positions, because they have always hired men, and many companies may believe that they do not see women in that position. This is also influenced by the media as well, as “women hold only 3% of clout positions in telecommunications, entertainment, publishing and advertising.”(Newsom 2011). With so few women leaders in the media industry, women are rarely portrayed in highly respected executives roles. This in turn communicates to young girls and the public in general that women are not supposed to hold these
Women have been entering the workforce since the 1970’s at an increasing rate. Statistics show that 39% of the workforce during the 1970’s were women. In 2010 that percentage increased to 47% (Gender, Web). As more women enter the workforce, even with the possibility of increased fraternization and sexual harassment, there should be equality in pay and positions.
This skewed representation has raised many alarms in outside circles on why the tech industry deals with such uniformity. In the show Silicon Valley this stereotype of women not being leaders is subtly perpetuated throughout the series. In episode one we are introduced to two companies that are competing against each other. The first company is Hooli incorporated which has a male CEO, looking closely in the boardroom the only gender represented is male, however the only females present in the office are the female secretaries. The same uniformity is present in the competing firm, male CEO, male president, male board members, and female secretary. Throughout the entire first season not one woman holds a position in leadership, and when we are introduced to a female character she usually holds a position working as an assistant to one of the male characters. Silicon Valley deals with the issue of not injecting women into higher power position, unfortunately many of these stereotypes are found in many industries around the world. The portrayal of women as being incapable of being good leaders leads to a male dominated managerial system. A study conducted by the Wall Street Journal finds that “Only ten percent of directors at Silicon Valley are women.” (Wells 2) this glass ceiling keeps women from reaching position that they are fully qualified for, just because they are perceived to be ineffective
Helen Norton, “the Director of Legal and Public Policy for the National Partnership for Women and Families,” says, “Less than 5% of senior managers in Fortune 1000 companies are women and minorities, according to the fact-finding report issued by the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission in 1995” (Leporini). It was stated that “women comprise 46% of the total workforce, and minorities comprise 21%” (Leporini). The commission pushed the “corporate affirmative action as a tool” (Leporini). This helped, “fully utilize a diverse labor force and maintain a competitive presence in the global economy”
For centuries women have always strived to be as equal and superior as men. From shifting themselves as the careful house wife attending to the children, to helping out in factories and serving in war during the early 1900’s. Then eventually women received the right to vote. Women then began to receive and further their education, becoming professionals like men were. The past century has been a century where women have been catching up to men proving to be just as superior as men.
While women make up 46.6% of the Fortune 500 workforce and 51.4% of middle management, according to Catalyst, in these companies they represent only 14.1% of executive officers, 7.5% of the highest paid and only 4% of CEO’s Despite the fact that women have a foot in the door with 4% of all CEO positions of the Fortune 500, the rest of their frame is stuck in the entry level, which is 46.6% of the Fortune 500 workforce. The difference is not in men and women; it is in masculine vs. feminine ways of thinking and acting. Both men and women incorporate masculine and feminine approaches (Forbes).
When First Lady Hillary Clinton delivered her speech “Women’s Rights Are Human Rights” at the United Nations 4th World Conference in 1995, she focused on giving voice to the inequality of women in countries around the world. Hoping to raise awareness about women’s rights Clinton says, “We are focusing world attention on issues that matter most in our lives -- the lives of women and their families.” She expands on the statement by helping the men identify with the women in their lives such as their mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters. Hillary effectively persuades the audience of delegates, government officials, and people from around the world to identify with the need to empower, strengthen and support women in their lives. In this speech, Hillary uses ethos, logos, pathos, and repetition to successfully deliver a compelling argument for revolution.
Women are becoming the main income provider, while the men are staying home with the children and it is making it so families are changing and men and women’s jobs in the home are combining to be not so gender specific. With more women working, this is making a difference and it is allowing the pay gap to narrow. This is not changing however, the amount of men vs. women in top management among corporations. Among G7 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United States, United Kingdom (What are the G7 Coutries?, 2017)), roughly 4 out of 10 businesses have absolutely no women in their senior management positions. There was a 1% increase in 2016, but this is an overall number. Some countries have gone down in senior management roles held by women while others have increased (Medland, 2016). When it comes to population based on gender in the United States, males are slightly outnumbered.
In August 2012 a team of researchers at the Credit Suisse Research Institute issued a report in which they examined 2,360 companies globally from 2005 to 2011, looking for a relationship between gender diversity on corporate management boards and financial performance. Sure enough, the researchers found that companies with one or more women on the board delivered higher average returns on equity, lower gearing (that is, net debt to equity) and better average growth.
Even though numbers are slowly rising in the United States, there are still more men in executive positions than women. According to one survey, female workers only made up 43% of legislators, senior managers, and senior officials whereas male workers made up 57%. In congress, congresswomen make up only 17% of representation compared to congressmen making up 83% (Ferrante, 2011, p. 312). Gender stratification is one explanation for the tremendous gap. Ferrante (2011) describes gender stratification as the unequal distribution of opportunities and resources amongst male and female employees. (p. 311) For example, male workers have an increased opportunity to receive a promotion than a female worker. According to Tinsley (2013), women are more likely to receive executive positions when a company is doing well, rather than when a company is suffering. Some companies stereotype that women workers will leave the workforce soon to bear children, limiting their chances of achieving executive status (Ferrante, 2011, p. 316).
Human rights abuse is the breakthrough for countless altered nations in the 20th century. Citizens from every country privileges were abused, they dealt with violence and strived for independence. Being denied freedom in their country! Many different people with power who established the law in terms of what many thought was the best for the people brought it out. A big major issue was women’s rights that were and still are examined as lower to men. Years after of plenty of hard work and battling for equality women gained and were granted their rights to independence. Canada succeeded through three women-based affiliations which was founded acceptable to women’s freedom; Women’s Rights Movements, Royal Commission on the Status of Women in Canada and Women’s Suffrage.