Women’s Leadership


The New York Times: Letters to the Editor
Marie C. Wilson
June 18, 2010

Ross Douthat ends his June 14 column, “No Mystique About Feminism,” with the assertion that the emergence of the most recent round of conservative victories is a happy consequence of the victories of the women’s movement. He is right: the women who won this month have the feminist movement, and especially the ’70s liberal wave of feminism, to thank for opening the public world of politics to women.

What gets lost in Mr. Douthat’s analysis is the slippery slope that we may find ourselves on if the policies that made it possible for Carly Fiorina et al. are not supported going forward. Women must have choices about how many children they can support, affordable child care options and the ability to earn a living that will allow more of them to run for office and lead in other sectors as well.

Women make up only 17 percent of political leaders today, and the White House Project’s most recent research, “Benchmarking Women’s Leadership,” shows that across 10 sectors of American culture, women on average are only 18 percent of its leaders. If the full range of health, economic and safety options is not supported by the women who advance, then they will pull the ladder up behind them.

Marie C. Wilson
President and Founder
The White House Project
New York, June 14, 2010

Want to read more of the original article? Click here.

By Robyn Gordon
March 8, 2010

Last night’s 82nd Academy Awards saw film history made with the first woman ever winning the Oscar for Best Director.  Kathryn Bigelow, director of the 2008 American war film, The Hurt Locker, which follows a United States Army Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) team during the Iraq War, took home the Oscar over ex-husband James Cameron for his direction of Avatar, in addition to Quentin Tarantino for Inglourious Basterds.  Bigelow is only the fourth woman in history and the second American woman to be nominated for the honor of Best Director, following Lena Wertmuller for Seven Beauties (1975), Jane Campion for The Piano (1993) and Sofia Coppola for Lost in Translation (2003).  Bigelow’s win is certainly appropriate in celebrating today’s International Women’s Day.

Bigelow, a graduate of Columbia University’s film program, began her film career in 1978 with The Set-Up, a 20-minute short deconstruction of violence in film.  She then released her first feature-length film in 1982, The Loveless, a biker movie which she co-directed with Monty Montgomery.  Other notable projects include Point Break (1991), Strange Days (1995), written and produced by her ex-husband, James Cameron, and 2002′s K-19: The Widowmaker, which starred Harrison Ford and Liam Neeson.  Following K-19, it would be six years, until The Hurt Locker, before Bigelow would return to the director’s seat.

Although Bigelow described her win as “the moment of a lifetime,” and Best Director presenter Barbra Streisand declared that finally “the time has come” for a female Best Director winner, Bigelow more importantly asserted that she “long[s] for the day when a [gender] modifier can be a moot point.”  She ended her acceptance speech with a dedication to “the women and men who risk their lives on a daily basis in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

Harvard Business Review
By Orit Gadiesh and Julie Coffman

Companies say they treat men and women equally — but in reality, they don’t. Our recent gender-parity survey of more than 1,800 business people worldwide, conducted in association with HBR.org, shows that in fact, employees are disappointed with the way their company handles the issue of gender parity — the attempt to treat men and women equally in the workforce. Nearly 80 percent of women and men say they are convinced of the benefits of gender parity at all levels. But only about 20 percent believe their companies actually put meaningful resources behind it.

Most companies simply fall down in the follow-through. Almost three-quarters of respondents say their companies launched initiatives like flex work programs and mentorships, but fewer than 25 percent feel they are effective: employees just don’t see enough women in leadership positions at their company. Fully 60 percent of survey respondents say they are not solicited for their opinions on gender parity by their companies. The dismal metrics get worse: Less than 20 percent report that their companies effectively utilize gender parity metrics to track progress. Only 14 percent say they had effective gender parity training or workshops. Just 8 percent believe their firms effectively tied incentives and compensation to gender parity.

Read more at: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2010/02/why_women_still_arent_equals_i.html

February 5, 2010
By Robyn Gordon

According to Louis O. Schwartz, President of the American Sportscaster Association, women have come a long way “from just another ‘Barbie-on-the-air’ image to complement the sportscasting done by men, to today’s qualified and respected professional hired for her skills and knowledge.” While Sports Illustrated estimated in 1991 that fewer than 50 women were working as sportscasters at the 630 serious network affiliates around the country, Fox Sports News Producer Bob Steinfeld asserts that the past ten years have seen growth in the number of women in sports broadcasting by about 50%, with such well-known broadcasters as Lesley Vissey, Robin Roberts, and Andrea Kremer. While male sportscasters still outnumber female sports broadcasters, women are participating more and more in sports, both at the collegiate and professional level, and women comprise a growing percentage of sports audiences. As a result, opportunities for both female ex-athletes and female broadcasters to enter into the field continues to rise.

ane Chastain, Donna De Varona, and Jeannie Morris are considered the pioneers in female sports broadcasting (though in the 1930s and 40s,the wife of Harry Johnson, sports announcer for Central Sates Broadcasting in Omaha, Nebraska, would often provide her own commentary alongside her husband), each working for major news networks in the 1960s and 70s. Chastain became the first woman to work as a commentator for a major network (CBS) and is also considered the first woman to do sports play-by-play. Morris, an established journalist and writer prior to launching her sports reporting career, was recognized for covering the NFL Minnesota Vikings v. Chicago Bears game in the early 1970s outside in a blizzard, as she was not allowed to work in the press box because she was a woman. Later, while women were finally allowed to report from inside press boxes, often stadiums and sports arenas did not provide restroom facilities for female reporters, who were expected to use bathrooms designated for spectators.

Today, unfortunately, while the number of female sportscasters is on the rise, Karen Kornacki, sportscaster for KMBC-TV News in Kansas City, reveals that appearance still plays quite a role in such an image-driven business and culture as the sports world: “Looks are definitely starting to play a larger role,” Kornacki said. “The number one email I receive from my viewers are comments about my appearance. People are not concerned about my interviews or my knowledge of the game.” Still, she remans optimistic, arguing that “the challenge is to stick by your professionalism,” said Kornacki. “It is still a medium where you have to communicate. Our audience is sports savvy and they would be able to see right through you if you didn’t know your stuff.” Lesley Visser, the first female NFL analyst on TV and voted the number one female sportscaster in the US by the American Sportscasters Association, agrees, indicating that “The three most important things for a sportscaster are knowledge of the game, a passion for sports, and the profession, and the stamina to struggle.” So while female sports journalism is still considered young and novel to many sports fans and among sports commentators, female sportscasters are determined and will continue to convince the world that gender should not and does not affect an individual’s ability to report a story, regardless of its content, and report it well.

The Huffington Post
Faith Winter, Training and Outreach Director at the White House Project
January 15, 2010

With Governor Ritter’s surprise announcement last week the dominos quickly fell into place on the pecking order of who should be the nominee for Governor.

The general consensus was 1. Secretary Salazar, 2. Mayor Hickenlooper, 3. Representative Perlmutter. And now Mayor Hickenlooper has announced he will run for Governor. This quick “hand over” of the nomination to the top executive position in our state prompted me to think about exactly what (or who) makes a candidate? Why were these three our “go-to” guys? The immediate answer is they each have the requisite experience and viability. This is a trend in our state. During the 2009 Senate appointment process to fill Secretary Salazar’s seat, women were also left off of the short list.

This then begs the question: why were many of our female elected officials and potential candidates with an equal or greater measure of these requirements overlooked?

Ask people what makes a viable candidate and most will answer, “experience.” In these volatile times, the voting public is wary of electing someone who hasn’t been around the block a few times. If “experience” is the primary criteria, it is followed closely “viability”: the ability to raise money state-wide, and by having name-recognition across the state. Given where Colorado is financially, we would assume voters would appreciate a candidate with intimate knowledge of the workings of the state budgetary process. Perhaps even someone who has steered the state through one of the worst recessions this country has ever seen. Our State Treasurer Cary Kennedy fits the bill entirely, and yet she was passed over for consideration.

I have heard from a lot of people that Mayor Hickenlooper and Secretary Salazar were at the top of the list of potential gubernatorial candidates because they have proven that they could win a state-wide race. But Treasurer Kennedy has successfully run state- wide, has proven she can raise money for a state-wide race, and is seen as a leading expert on the issue that every poll shows is number one on the minds of Colorado’s voters: the economy. Another potential candidate, Representative Betsy Markey, represents a larger geographic area than Mayor Hickenlooper and her colleague Rep. Perlmutter, whom the media was also touting as a potential candidate for the governor’s seat.

I have also heard that there is a pecking order to the nomination for governor, and therefore Treasurer Kennedy has to “wait her turn”. If our list of potential candidates is based on seniority then Representative Diana Degette should have been at the top of the list. She is the Democrats senior member in congress.

Aside from these empirical facts, Colorado likes electing women. We were the first state to elect a woman state wide in 1899, and last year led the nation in the number of women in our legislature. Our recently released study, “The White House Project Report: Benchmarking Women’s Leadership” cited recent polling by the gFk/Roper that showed voters trust women as much if not more than men to lead on important issues. Given all this, the perception that Treasurer Kennedy could not win, or would have less of a chance to succeed than someone like Mayor Hickenlooper or Representative Perlmutter is false.

The reason these women were not immediately on the list or part of everyone’s discussions of who will run in Governor Ritter’s place has just as much if not more to do with the media and culture than electability and experience.

In 2000 The White House Project conducted some ground breaking research called “Hair, Hemlines and Husbands”. The conclusion was that not only were male candidates covered more frequently by the news media, but the coverage was focused on their stances on the issues and on their voting records, while the discussion around the female candidates often revolved around their hair, their hemlines and their husbands.

We followed up that research in 2001 with “From Soundbites to Solutions”. This research found that on political talk shows, and on interviews between the media and political experts, male guests outnumbered female guest 9 to1. We also found that these appearances have an influence over the electorate if forming perceptions of who is qualified to lead and who is not based on who is sitting at the table.

In the days since Governor Ritter announced his decision, Mayor Hickenlooper was mentioned dozens of times and has been in the headlines at least seven times. Both Salazar and Perlmutter have also been mentioned dozens of times. It was a full three days before many of the political blogs, news websites and TV stations began to mention Treasurer Kennedy, or Representatives Markey or DeGette in more than a tokenizing way. At the same time many of mentions of Treasurer Kennedy pointedly noted that she was a mother, and mused on how that would weigh on her decision. Mayor Hickenlooper’s family was only mentioned once or twice out of dozens of mentions of his decision.

These not-so-subtle endorsements of Mayor Hickenlooper by the media made his announcement appear inevitable. The media had elevated him to frontrunner status as the Democratic nominee before he even formally entered the race.

We need to make the Colorado state-wide political bench bigger and more diverse, and we need the media to focus on female candidates as seriously as they have on their male counterparts.

My call to action is threefold:

  1. Let’s ask our local media to examine their coverage of potential female candidates for the governor’s race, so they can clearly see the gender-bias in their reporting.
  2. As members of the electorate, let’s ask our political parties to push all viable candidates to the top, and let’s ask ourselves to start thinking of female candidates as serious contenders.
  3. And finally, let’s ask a competent woman we know to run for office, from the local level all the way through to a candidate like Treasurer Kennedy. The number one reason women run for office is that someone says, ” I believe in you and you should run”.

If we all take these three steps, the next election cycle in Colorado could be truly representative of the diversity and talent our state has to offer. We deserve nothing less.

BROOKLYN COLLEGE WOMEN TAKE THE POLITICAL LEAD

New voices. New visions. New leadership.

The White House Project’s “Go Lead!” Training Program Kicks Off for 2010

Political Leadership Training

Friday, January 8, 2010

Brooklyn College Student Center

Campus Road & East 27th Street, 6th Floor

The White House Project and Brooklyn College have announced their partnership to bring the award-winning Vote, Run, Lead training program to the women of the Brooklyn College community.

To kick off 2010 with their political leadership training program, the WHP will train 100 women on January 8, from 8am-8pm, featuring activist and writer Kevin Powell, Binghamton City Council Woman Lea Webb, Brooklyn Deputy Borough President Yvonne Graham, New York State Assemblywomen Joan Millman and Rhoda Jacobs.

The Brooklyn College training, Go Lead, is a unique daylong event which aims to inspire young women to enter the world of politics by teaching innovative skills and strategies needed to run for office. The overall goal is to foster a positive environment in which young women can actively contribute to, and transform the political arena. From fundraising to public speaking, campaign management to coalition building, Vote, Run, Lead offers the vital nuts-and-bolts skills and network of support to help women lead politically and succeed.

“We need a massive effort to recruit, train, and support women running for office,” said Marie Wilson, President and Founder of The White House Project. “Go Lead empowers women to be at the forefront of politics by providing innovative skills, strategies, and networks for leadership.”

Go Lead will serve as the foundation for young, smart, ambitious women of Brooklyn College to pursue promising futures in politics.

“Now is the perfect time to embrace change and to get involved with such a strong collaborative effort that aims to better women and society overall,” said Professor Namita Manohar, Coordinator of the Women’s Studies Program at Brooklyn College.

The White House Project is a national, nonpartisan organization which works to advance a critical mass of diverse women into leadership.  The organization has trained over 9,000 women nationwide through their award-winning Vote, Run, Lead program since 2004.  For more information, please visit www.thewhitehouseproject.org

The Huffington Post
Diane Tucker
December 15, 2009

Since the recession began, millions of women have found themselves underemployed, working in survival jobs for which they’re overqualified. If you’re in the process of making similar life changes, why not run for office? America needs more women in politics.

Because why?

“Governments with more women legislators are more productive,” noted the World Economic Forum.

“National parliaments with the largest numbers of women have the lowest levels of corruption,” reported the World Bank.

It’s a shame more American women aren’t thinking outside the box, by putting their names inside the ballot box. Men still dramatically outnumber women in the U.S. Senate, the House of Representatives, state legislatures, and city councils. The U.S. ranks a pathetic 71st out of 189 countries in the proportion of women in national legislatures. American women aren’t even close to the magical 33% tipping point where we could begin to change the conversation.

No wonder the big stimulus winner in 2009 was Wall Street. The Old Boy’s Club decided that if we bailed out Wall Street, the problems on Main Street would take care of themselves. “Nonsense!” said my gal pals, but few politicians heard them.

More women in politics — that’s change I can believe in.

I know, I know, it means we would have to knock on doors … and we would have to raise money … mean people might diss us … and … and …

Ladies, it’s time to stop eliminating ourselves from positions of power. Today I spoke with a woman who took the plunge, got elected, loves her new career, and is happy to share lessons learned. Anne Doyle was one of the first women in the U.S. to gain access to professional locker rooms as a sports reporter for CBS-TV in Detroit. Years later, she rose through the ranks of Ford Motor Company to become director of North America Communications. In 2009 she ran for a seat on the Auburn Hills City Council — and won.

* * *

Politicians live in a fishbowl. Weren’t you afraid of becoming so visible a target?

Anne Doyle: No, not at all, but I understand what you’re saying. Fear is a huge barrier for women. I worked for three decades in sportscasting and the auto industry, places where people didn’t always want me. I’m not afraid anymore.

But don’t you think a lot of women are too thin-skinned for politics?

Women are better able than men to receive emotional messages. It’s one of our strengths, but it also makes us more vulnerable. If we’re going to put ourselves out there and become leaders, we simply have to accept that a certain number of people aren’t going to like us. You grow thick skin like bark on a tree — it takes time. The more you let the criticisms go, the better you get at it.

Is fundraising another huge barrier for women?

I had no problem raising money at all. In fact, and this is funny, I was so successful at raising money the other candidates started saying, “Hey, she’s trying to buy the election!”

Well then, you’re the right person to ask for advice on soliciting campaign contributions.

You start with people who believe in you. I wrote a personal letter outlining what I wanted to do, and asking for help. In response, several friends wrote sizable checks and it turbo-charged me. A California woman learned about me online and mailed a check. That was huge! We all have to write bigger checks for other women. It’s in our best interest to get more women into politics.

2009-12-15-Anne.Campaign.500.jpg

Why is 33% considered the tipping point?

It’s critical mass — the point at which an environment changes in such a way, it can no longer go back to what it was. Take the Supreme Court, for example. One woman justice is newsworthy — she’s first. Two women are still the exception, not the rule. When you have three women on the bench, it stops being unusual.

Whether you’re talking about the halls of Congress or a board of directors, until women achieve 33% we’re just tokens. Our numbers are too small to influence men to see things in a completely different way. It’s not that women are better, it’s that balance among the two genders is better. Across the board in a variety of professions, the number of women in leadership positions today is only 18%. We have a long way to go. That’s why it’s all about numbers now.

How do we move the needle?

We can move the needle the fastest by getting more women elected to political office, because that’s where female leaders are the most visible.

I was surprised to learn that women’s progress into leadership positions has been stagnating for more than a decade.

We made tremendous progress in the 70s and 80s, but in the 90s and 2000s the numbers got bigger only in the middle. Today we have more women doctors, more women lawyers, more women with graduate degrees, but we are stalled in terms of progress into leadership positions that shape the culture. How many women CEOs are there today? That number has barely changed in 20 years, even though there is a perception that it has.

Let’s say I want to throw my hat in the ring. What are the first three things I should do?

First, start talking about it. I guarantee you’ll be amazed at the encouragement you get. Next, become very clear about why you want to run. One way to do this is by developing your candidate website. It doesn’t have to be fancy, but the process will force you to put into concise words who you are and what you stand for. Finally, make a list of people you can ask for campaign contributions, because you’ll need money for postage, a Web site, and campaign materials.

On the slim chance I raise more than $2 in campaign contributions, what’s next?

I highly recommend the White House Project training. It’s a national, non-partisan initiative focused on dramatically increasing the number of women running for office. They’ve already trained over 9,000 women candidates, and hope to train well over 36,000 by 2013. I enrolled in their Debate Boot Camp, where I learned how to refine my message and present it to a large group.

You took the risk and ran for office. What was the reward?

Knocking on doors, I met the incredible people who are my neighbors. It created a powerful sense of community. That was the richest reward for me. You can’t imagine how it feels, seeing your yard sign on the front lawn of people you’ve never met. I would jump out of my car and introduce myself. After the election, I was keenly aware these people were counting on me.

How does being a politician compare to being a journalist or a corporate executive?

Journalists are independent operators — they develop and write a story, it’s their own work — and corporate executives make many decisions unilaterally. Political leaders, however, can’t get much done by themselves. You have to collaborate. You have to influence people. Somebody called politics the art of the possible. It’s about getting people to evolve together. Where’s our common ground?

Can women excel at this?

The experience of running convinced me that women have a tremendous natural ability for politics. We just have to get over our fear of it and go for the brass ring. The good news is that there’s been a dramatic change in attitude about women in leadership positions. I want to say to women, “C’mon, let’s go!”

To view the original article click here.

Practicing What I Preach on the Campaign Trail
By Anne Doyle

For years, I’ve been whining about how few women political leaders and elected officials we have in the U.S.  – even today.  From the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate to state legislatures and local school boards,  men still dramatically outnumber women.   We’re not even close to that magical 33% tipping point where you begin to change the conversation.

So, every chance I get, I’m always urging women to run for office.   This spring, it was another woman who finally called my bluff.   Mari Harvey Edwards, the former Mayor of my hometown of Auburn Hills, Michigan, told me, “Anne, how about practicing what you preach?  Why don’t you stick your own neck out there and run?”

She nailed me.  So I ran — for a seat on the Auburn Hills City Council. And I won!

Running for office requires moving out of comfort zones, knocking on unfamiliar doors and reaching out to neighbors in ways that daily life rarely requires.   In the process, it is the candidate who is enriched.

What did I learn?  Plenty.  The biggest insight is this:  American women are on the verge of a tremendous surge into political leadership.   What makes me so confident?

• We’ve learned that power takes money – and we’re getting over our fear of ASKING and GIVING. In the beginning, it wasn’t easy for me to ask for money.  But once a few great friends turbo-charged me with big checks, I started to get the hang of it.   Mine was a non-partisan election, and I was thrilled to receive checks from friends and colleagues from all sides of the political spectrum.  Each check that arrived was a vote of confidence.  A signal of trust.  I still can’t get over Eileen Padberg, a member of the California International Women’s Forum whom I’ve never met.  She wrote a check for my campaign because, as she put it, “I want to support another woman leader.”  So don’t believe that old husbands’ tale that “women can’t raise money.”  Yes we can!

• We’ve learned that we don’t have to do everything ourselves.  My bet is that most of you have as difficult a time as I do asking for help.  We’re so used to being independent and proving  how doggone capable we are that it feels like weakness to ask for help.  Sound familiar?  You just can’t run for office, at least not successfully, all by yourself.  You have to give in and accept help from others.  I was astonished by the amount of time that friends generously gave to help me with the campaign.  I was also incredibly lucky to have several high-powered, highly-accomplished, Type A friends in “career transition” with a little extra time on their hands.  We had a lot of fun together, and we all developed new skills in the process.   My 17-year-old son, Kevin, and his best friend, Luke,  – pictured here — also helped and learned about being engaged citizens.

• The pool of political mentors is getting deeper.  I had tremendous support from other women political leaders.   For example: Michigan Senator Gilda Jacobs, a seasoned politician, schooled me in campaign strategy and tactics.  Southfield Mayor Brenda Lawrence took the time to knock on doors for me, even though she was running for re-election herself.  I returned the favor, of course.  She was elected to a third term with 78% of the vote.  Clearly I needed the help more than she did!  County Commissioner Marcia Gershenson braved the cold and bitter winds on election day to stand outside voting precincts for me.  And it wasn’t just women who gave me a hand.  State Representative Tim Melton and County Commissioner Tim Greimel also jumped in with both feet.

• The White House Project is in high gear.  The WHP is another key reason I believe we’re about to see a big increase in the number of women political leaders.  It’s one thing to encourage women to run.  It’s another thing entirely to launch a national, non-partisan initiative focused purely on dramatically increasing the number of women running for office.  The WHP has already trained over 15,000 women candidates and plans to train over 36,000 by 2013.  I’m part of the Michigan Cabinet of the White House Project and also attended their one-day Debate Boot Camp.  Remember the TV series Commander-in-Chief, with actress Gina Davis playing the first female president?   Davis now serves on the National Board of the WHP, and last week met with women political leaders in Detroit, telling us, “It’s all about numbers.  We need to see a big increasing in the number of women holding office.”  In the photo with Gina is White House Project Founder and President Marie Wilson and Saunteel Jenkins, newly elected member of the Detroit City Council.
IT’S ALL ABOUT TRUST: It’s an incredible feeling to see your campaign yard signs on the front lawns of people you’ve never met.  I found myself stopping my car and running up to their doors to introduce myself and thank them.  It’s an even more humbling experience to stand at the City Clerk’s office on election night and watch the votes come in.   My joy over winning was quickly replaced with an overwhelming feeling of responsibility.  You start realizing very quickly that people are counting on you to represent them – to be at all of those meetings that they don’t have time to attend.  To be careful stewards of their resources and make the best decisions you can.

It wasn’t that long ago that women doctors and lawyers were in the minority.  Yet today, we’re on the verge of more women graduating from law school and medical school than men.

I predict the same thing is going to happen – sooner rather than later – in political leadership.  Let’s help each other over the hump.   Culturally, women still need that extra nudge.  I needed it, too.  Yet once I walked out onto the edge of that psychological “high diving board” and took the plunge into the political waters, I was absolutely astonished at the support that materialized all around me.

It felt like I was being lifted by invisbile forces.  Or, as if a strong wind was at my back  – urging me forward.  It’s urging you, too.  Come Run With Me!

To read the original article click here.

Forbes Woman
By Jennifer Allyn
November 23, 2009

Earlier this month, the White House Project released a report benchmarking women’s leadership in 10 different sectors. The good news is a majority of Americans (89%) are comfortable with women leaders. The bad news is women comprise only 18% of those leaders. Whether it’s business (16%), law (18%), journalism (22%) or the military (11%), women leaders have yet to achieve critical mass. The question is why and what will it take to have a breakthrough in those numbers?

In my opinion, it’s going to take ambition. When organizations talk about diversity and talent management, the conversation about ambition is noticeably absent. One reason is that it’s complicated. There are many things that influence our aspirations–family background, personality, talents and experience, among others–but gender also plays a major role. Men are assumed to be ambitious until proven otherwise. In contrast, women still receive mixed messages about their style, their commitment to work and their ability to combine leadership with family. As a result, organizations need to be more gender intelligent when it comes to identifying and grooming female leaders.

In her book Necessary Dreams: Ambition in Women’s Changing Lives, Anna Fels writes about the social pressures that undermine women’s career aspirations. According to Fels, ambition is composed of two key elements, the first of which is a desire for mastery. Over the last century, as women earned the rights and privileges that were once the domain of men, they demonstrated their commitment to mastery. But mastery of any task takes a long time, which makes recognition the second crucial ingredient: To sustain any ambition individuals need to be recognized, at frequent intervals, by a larger community.

While Americans love stories about people who succeed against all odds, the truth is leaders rise to the top with enormous help from a network of parents, teachers, mentors, peers and supervisors.

Recognition becomes a challenge for women because our expectations about femininity are not easily reconciled with our notions of decisive leadership. Or, as Anna Quindlen once wrote, we want women leaders to be “tough as nails and warm as toast.”

Furthermore, ambition is regarded as a masculine trait, so many women are reluctant even to claim the term. During a panel discussion at my firm we asked the audience what they felt when they heard the word “ambitious” used to describe someone. Almost all the men (94%) had positive connotations, compared with only 57% of the women; and 24% of the women had negative connotations about the word.

Then there is the work and family dilemma. When men become parents their commitment to work is presumed to increase. Wanting to advance on behalf of the family is a central part of a breadwinner’s role. As a result, fathers receive approval for sustaining their professional ambitions as they juggle family responsibilities. In contrast, women’s careers are still viewed as competing with their role as mothers. Suddenly the social feedback becomes mixed and working mothers have to justify their commitment to their careers and prove their worth as parents. That’s why motherhood is a critical milestone where women evaluate, and often downgrade, their long-term ambitions in favor of short-term balance. Organizations have an important role to play in changing that dynamic. By providing flexible options and elongating career paths, women would be able to slow down without giving up their aspirations.

Sigmund Freud famously asked “What do women want?” Too often I’ve observed women wanting what they think they can have. And according to this benchmarking report, that’s 18% of leadership positions.

Women, and the organizations they work for, should want more. To aim higher we need to reclaim the word “ambition,” step up to leadership despite the challenges and help each other sustain our dreams by offering our peers and protégés the all-important recognition upon which their success depends.

Jennifer Allyn is a managing director at PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, where she is responsible for designing programs to retain, develop and advance women at the firm.

To view original article click here.

November 20, 2009

The Washington Post

by Marie Wilson

In spite of Sarah Palin’s prominence as best-selling author, Hillary Clinton’s stature as Secretary of State, and 51% of the workforce now being female, we still face a crisis in women’s leadership, according to The White House Project’s just-published study, Benchmarking Women’s Leadership.

The majority of Americans are comfortable with women leading in all sectors, but the reality is women hold only 18% of leadership positions across the 10 sectors we examined, including politics, business, law, sports, academia, journalism, religion, film/TV, nonprofit, and military.

In politics, for example, women have lost ground in the last decade as elected statewide executive officials and have made only incremental gains in Congress, where they currently comprise 17% of leadership. On a global scale, the U.S. ranks a dismal 71st out of 189 countries, according to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, in terms of women in legislatures, trailing behind nations such as Pakistan, Cuba, and United Arab Emirates.

At Fortune 500 companies, women hold only 15% of board seats, 16% of corporate officer positions, and a mere 3% of CEO positions, while women of color make up only 3% of board officers and 1.7% of corporate officer positions.

Even in sectors that have traditionally welcomed women – such as the nonprofit field – the numbers reflect the same disparity. Women comprise 75% of nonprofit employees, but hold only 26% of leadership positions. Women nonprofit CEO’s make only 74% of what their male counterparts earn.

The list goes on: from sports and military to religion and journalism, women are underrepresented in the halls of power and underpaid when they get there. So why does this matter, particularly when our nation faces such trying economic times?

As our Benchmarks report illustrates, the rose-colored lens through which we have examined gender in the workforce clouds this grim reality: women – and particularly women of color — are far from achieving parity in the arenas in which their participation and inclusion matters most: positions of leadership. And contrary to the popular talking points of today, the cultural ideal for women has not shifted to an all-encompassing and gender-neutral space, but remains firmly embedded in models of wifedom and motherhood. If anything, there is evidence that this cultural ideal is becoming further entrenched as the economy triggers anxieties about gender roles within both the public and private spheres.

I have been an advocate for women’s issues for over 30 years. From the feminist and civil rights movements of the 1960s and 70s to today’s “post-modern” struggles for equality, I have learned three important things: increasing numbers and changing culture are not mutually exclusive but mutually reinforcing vehicles; action must be taken from the top down and the bottom up; and instituting change cannot be limited to one sector, but must be tackled in every sphere.

When we set out to write The Benchmarks Report, we were determined not only to puncture the conventional wisdom that women are leading in record numbers, but to poll experts in each sector and determine what steps need to be taken to achieve a critical mass of women leaders across the board. Here are our recommendations for closing the leadership gap:

Work to achieve a critical mass of women in leadership roles in every sector. A critical mass of one-third or more women in leadership positions is essential for implementing and maintaining the changes recommended in this report.

Use financial resources strategically. In choosing which firms to hire or which non-profits to fund, look through a gender lens, considering the representation of women, and women of color, on the board and in top leadership.

Amplify women’s voices in the public arena. Prominently include women leaders in public forums and media so that they in particular–and women in general–are recognized as role models and considered for boards and other top-level positions.

Collect and analyze the data. Surprisingly little information exists regarding the representation of women, and particularly women of color, in positions of leadership in individual organizations. Regular tracking and reviewing of the numbers – including the wage gap — are essential for setting benchmarks and monitoring progress.

Maintain accountability through setting targets. If you lead an organization, set specific goals for including women in leadership. Create a timeline to achieve targets and impose actual consequences for failure to meet these targets.

Improve flexibility in workplace structures. For women and men alike, increased flexibility–and a recognition of the need for work-life balance–promotes career satisfaction and job retention.

Nothing has surprised me more in working to advance women’s leadership than women’s own measurement of personal success and the routes they must navigate to get there. As a young woman in a major financial firm told me, “They watch you here, and if you are perceived to be too involved with your children, you are not seen as a good candidate for leadership. If you are not involved enough, you are seen as a bad mother and not to be trusted.” I was shocked to hear that an older woman pulled her aside after the meeting and remarked, “There are lots of children you can love; go find them. But if you want to succeed here, don’t have children of your own.”

Unfortunately, that naysayer seems to be right. Perhaps that’s why so many executive women who have been on the leadership track have chosen to never marry or have children (52% and 61%, respectively, according to a UCLA-Korn Ferry study; for executive men, 5% and 3%, respectively). The sacrifices women must make to ascend the leadership ranks are still disproportionate to those made by their male peers. Numbers like this show that the lack of flexibility and childcare in the U.S. is not improving fast enough to allow the numbers of women stuck in the pipeline to really ascend. Instead, they remain in lower positions or opt-out completely from the workforce. In either case, the pool of ideas, talent, and experience among our decision makers shrinks.

Over the long term, I am optimistic about making change. Three polls conducted over five years as part of our Benchmarks report revealed that 90 percent of Americans are comfortable with women leading across the ten sectors profiled, from business and politics to film and journalism. As a 2008 Pew Research Center study found, the public thinks that women – even more than men – have what it takes to be leaders in today’s world, scoring women higher than men in five of eight character traits they value highly in their leaders. The recent report from Maria Shriver and the Center for American Progress, “A Woman’s Nation,” shows that, by and large, everyone believes that the inclusion of women at all levels, from government to business to our faith communities, is good for our economy and our country.

The acceleration in moving women into leadership will only occur if there is a thoughtful, creative, and committed approach to doing so. We must promote a national dialogue that sees women not as competitors for male jobs, but as allies in building a stronger economy and better institutions.

Most importantly, we need a cultural shift that values the unique leadership traits and diverse perspectives that both genders – men and women — bring to the table, and a commitment to having them work side-by-side to tackle the challenges we collectively face. These are difficult times, indeed. Yet history has taught us that these are the moments which are ripe for greatness, if we dare to imagine and embrace a new way.

Next Page »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.