ВУЗ:
Составители:
Рубрика:
39
It is true that the number of women di-
rectors in the United States has increased
dramatically, from 147 in 1976 to 300 in
1979, but the ratio of female to male direc-
tors remains remarkably small: there are
only 300 women directors on only 365 of
the Fortune “1,300” boards, whereas there
are about 16,000 men on these boards.
This new phenomenon of the woman
director is interesting; pressure to recruit
women directors, unlike that to employ
women in the general work force, does not
derive from legislation. The 935 compa-
nies among the top 1,300 that do not have
women on their boards are not subject to
penalty.
Derive: to have as a
starting point, source,
or origin.
Penalty: punishment
for failure to obey
rules or keep an agree-
ment.
But the pressure to recruit women di-
rectors is nevertheless real and recognized.
It comes primarily from stockholders,
from employees (in particular from women
employees, especially those at high levels),
and from consumers. This pressure reflects
a growing widespread concern with equal
employment opportunity, a tendency to
broaden definitions of corporate respon-
sibility, and a demand for greater account-
ability on the part of both director and
company.
On the other hand, the incentives to ap-
point women to boards have not yet been
clearly perceived. The contribution ex-
pected from women directors and the char-
acteristics, perspectives, and expertise
required to make that contribution have not
been adequately analyzed. The fascinating
thing is that the contribution expected from
women directors has not yet been defined
Stockholders: those
who own shares in a
company.
Corporate responsi-
bility: the idea of
duties that a company
is legally or morally
obliged to carry out.
such that it may be
blamed if it does not.
Accountability: re-
sponsibility; the ex-
pectation of having to
give an explanation.
Expertise: specialized
knowledge or ability.
40
either by corporate chairmen and their
nominating committees or by the women
candidates for those positions.
Chairmen (chairman
of the board): the
highest ranking board
members.
I will explore four separate aspects of
the problem:
1. The preferences of the chairmen.
2. Making a contract with the woman direc-
tor.
3. The challenge for women directors in the
1980s.
4. Selecting women candidates.
Preferences: which is
better liked or rather
chosen.
The chairmen's preferences
Specifications for directorships have
traditionally been loosely drawn. One thing
that has been fixed, however, is that the
chief executive officer has always been
.the most desirable candidate. Every CEO I
have talked with would like at least a half-
dozen chief executives on his board. When
the chairmen of the large corporations be-
gan to be interested in recruiting women for
their boards, they sought women in their
own image – chief executive officers. Such
women, however, are rare today.
The second preference of chairmen who
became interested in recruiting women was
often a woman who had the equivalent – or
nearly the equivalent – of CEO experience.
The boards of the top ten companies in the
Fortune “1,300” do not include a single
male from business who is not a chief ex-
ecutive, a former CEO, or the equivalent.
Specifications: in-
structions for the de-
sign and materials for
something to be made
or done. Director-
ships: the positions
held by board mem-
bers.
Chief executive offi-
cer (CEO): officer
holding top position in
any administrative
hierarchy, with duties
of advising and direct-
ing organizational
policies and of acting
as liaison officer be-
tween the administra-
tive and legislative
bodies.
The chairmen's third preference then be-
came women of high achievement outside
the business world and preferably – but not
It is true that the number of women di- either by corporate chairmen and their Chairmen (chairman
rectors in the United States has increased nominating committees or by the women of the board): the
dramatically, from 147 in 1976 to 300 in candidates for those positions. highest ranking board
1979, but the ratio of female to male direc- members.
tors remains remarkably small: there are I will explore four separate aspects of
only 300 women directors on only 365 of the problem:
the Fortune “1,300” boards, whereas there
1. The preferences of the chairmen. Preferences: which is
are about 16,000 men on these boards.
2. Making a contract with the woman direc- better liked or rather
This new phenomenon of the woman Derive: to have as a tor. chosen.
director is interesting; pressure to recruit starting point, source, 3. The challenge for women directors in the
women directors, unlike that to employ or origin. 1980s.
women in the general work force, does not Penalty: punishment 4. Selecting women candidates.
derive from legislation. The 935 compa- for failure to obey
The chairmen's preferences Specifications: in-
nies among the top 1,300 that do not have rules or keep an agree-
Specifications for directorships have structions for the de-
women on their boards are not subject to ment.
traditionally been loosely drawn. One thing sign and materials for
penalty.
that has been fixed, however, is that the something to be made
But the pressure to recruit women di- Stockholders: those chief executive officer has always been or done. Director-
rectors is nevertheless real and recognized. who own shares in a .the most desirable candidate. Every CEO I ships: the positions
It comes primarily from stockholders, company. have talked with would like at least a half- held by board mem-
from employees (in particular from women dozen chief executives on his board. When bers.
employees, especially those at high levels), the chairmen of the large corporations be- Chief executive offi-
and from consumers. This pressure reflects Corporate responsi- gan to be interested in recruiting women for cer (CEO): officer
a growing widespread concern with equal bility: the idea of their boards, they sought women in their holding top position in
employment opportunity, a tendency to duties that a company own image – chief executive officers. Such any administrative
broaden definitions of corporate respon- is legally or morally women, however, are rare today. hierarchy, with duties
sibility, and a demand for greater account- obliged to carry out. The second preference of chairmen who of advising and direct-
ability on the part of both director and such that it may be became interested in recruiting women was ing organizational
company. blamed if it does not. often a woman who had the equivalent – or policies and of acting
On the other hand, the incentives to ap- Accountability: re- nearly the equivalent – of CEO experience. as liaison officer be-
point women to boards have not yet been sponsibility; the ex- The boards of the top ten companies in the tween the administra-
clearly perceived. The contribution ex- pectation of having to Fortune “1,300” do not include a single tive and legislative
pected from women directors and the char- give an explanation. male from business who is not a chief ex- bodies.
acteristics, perspectives, and expertise ecutive, a former CEO, or the equivalent.
required to make that contribution have not Expertise: specialized
The chairmen's third preference then be-
been adequately analyzed. The fascinating knowledge or ability.
came women of high achievement outside
thing is that the contribution expected from
the business world and preferably – but not
women directors has not yet been defined
39 40
Страницы
- « первая
- ‹ предыдущая
- …
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- …
- следующая ›
- последняя »
