Hot off the press, but same old news….”Boards Remain Pale, Male and Stale” says Forbes leadership contributor Mike Myatt in his latest article on Board Diversity….
“The simple truth is U.S. companies lag many other developed nations with regard to board diversity. As an example, in countries like Sweden and Finland women hold nearly 30% of board seats, and Norway has a quota mandating women hold 40% of board seats. Given there have been numerous studies showing company performance on diverse boards exceeds that of those boards composed of male only members, it’s no wonder other countries have changed their practices. It’s time U.S. corporations follow suit.
While I’m a strong advocate of diversity, I’m not particularly in favor of mandates. I don’t believe our nation has often been well served by legislative mandates (even when well-intentioned) forced upon a free citizenry. Diversity has the most positive impact when blending occurs organically. When corporations lead with shared core values that place serving a greater purpose above serving the self-interests of a few, diversity naturally becomes the rule as opposed to the exception.
Interestingly, just last month, the State of California passed Senate Resolution 62, which calls for publicly held companies headquartered in California with boards of nine or more to fill a minimum of three of those seats with women, for boards with five to eight directors to fill a minimum of two of those seats with women, and for smaller boards to fill at least one seat with a woman. While this resolution stopped short of a mandate, it did signal what I believe is a step toward urging more equitable board composition.
Patricia Lenkov, who chairs my company’s executive search practice, and who sits on the advisory board for 20/20 Women on Boards, has long held the belief that “board diversity isn’t a supply problem, but rather it’s a demand problem.” I concur wholeheartedly. Chairs, CEOs, and lead directors must take a principled, vocal stand and demand boards reconstitute themselves in a fashion that best serves the fiduciary role with which they are charged.
My bottom line is this – corporations cannot appropriately represent the constituencies they serve until they are representatively led by members of those same constituencies. It is impossible to understand and engage in a meaningful fashion where those deserving a voice are denied a seat at the table. I’m not advocating for selecting directors who are anything other than the best person for the job, but we should all recognize the best person for the job is not universally a 56 year old, Ivy League educated, white male.”
Thoughts? Follow me on Twitter @mikemyatt
“The simple truth is U.S. companies lag many other developed nations with regard to board diversity. As an example, in countries like Sweden and Finland women hold nearly 30% of board seats, and Norway has a quota mandating women hold 40% of board seats. Given there have been numerous studies showing company performance on diverse boards exceeds that of those boards composed of male only members, it’s no wonder other countries have changed their practices. It’s time U.S. corporations follow suit.
While I’m a strong advocate of diversity, I’m not particularly in favor of mandates. I don’t believe our nation has often been well served by legislative mandates (even when well-intentioned) forced upon a free citizenry. Diversity has the most positive impact when blending occurs organically. When corporations lead with shared core values that place serving a greater purpose above serving the self-interests of a few, diversity naturally becomes the rule as opposed to the exception.
Interestingly, just last month, the State of California passed Senate Resolution 62, which calls for publicly held companies headquartered in California with boards of nine or more to fill a minimum of three of those seats with women, for boards with five to eight directors to fill a minimum of two of those seats with women, and for smaller boards to fill at least one seat with a woman. While this resolution stopped short of a mandate, it did signal what I believe is a step toward urging more equitable board composition.
Patricia Lenkov, who chairs my company’s executive search practice, and who sits on the advisory board for 20/20 Women on Boards, has long held the belief that “board diversity isn’t a supply problem, but rather it’s a demand problem.” I concur wholeheartedly. Chairs, CEOs, and lead directors must take a principled, vocal stand and demand boards reconstitute themselves in a fashion that best serves the fiduciary role with which they are charged.
My bottom line is this – corporations cannot appropriately represent the constituencies they serve until they are representatively led by members of those same constituencies. It is impossible to understand and engage in a meaningful fashion where those deserving a voice are denied a seat at the table. I’m not advocating for selecting directors who are anything other than the best person for the job, but we should all recognize the best person for the job is not universally a 56 year old, Ivy League educated, white male.”
Thoughts? Follow me on Twitter @mikemyatt
RSS Feed
