Playing the Game

Playing the Game: Women on Boards

Missed a post on this topic, yesterday.

The game targets women from the US and Canada. The dynamics are slightly different if the players are  Norway, Sweden, Finland , Denmark and the Netherlands. These countries have proportionately higher numbers of women in elected positions, and quotas for women on Boards. Canada and the US rank somewhat lower, have a lower proportion of women in elected positions and have comply or explain provisions with regulators. Therefore, they have somewhat fewer women on boards.

However, there are nuances here as well. Canada's lower representation seems to relate to industry mix and form size. The resource and materials sectors have the lowest proportion of women on boards. These sectors employ the fewest women (about 20% of their workforces), meaning that there are proportionately much fewer women in the pipeline. The finance and insurance sectors have a higher share of women employed in that sector and have a higher proportion of women on boards....about 17%. 

If you are in the US, its different again. There , 10-11% of resource company board members are female. In materials, it is 17-18%. 

Something else is at play, which you, as an ambitious woman, wanting to get on a board will need to consider: company size. In Canada, size matters. Large firms (revenue of > $5b) have 3-4 times the number of women on boards than do small firms (<$1b in revenue). Its not just turnover that makes it easier for a woman to get onto the board of a larger company. It is also that larger companies are more likely to embrace gender diversity. 

But that is not all. Ambition tends to go hand in hand with desire to be paid more. Larger firms also pay directors a lot more than do smaller firms. 

Finally..where to look, at least in Canada...S&P/TSX or S&P 500? 

Consider the categories you may want to consider if you are ready to get on a board: 

• telecom services..somewhat better for S&P/TSX
• consumer staples..somewhat better for S&P500
• utilities...a little better for S&P500
• consumer discretion..about the same
• fiancials...ditto
• health care...better for S&P 500
• industrials...ditto
• IT...ditto
• energy...a lot better for S&P 500
• materials...a lot better for S&P500

If you are just starting out and you want to get "in the pipeline" consider what industry to work in. You would have a greater expectation, the theory goes of working in an industry with a large pipeline to the top. So, healthcare, where 80%+ of the employees are female. (education, financial/insurance and accommodation and food services at 60%+).

Or the other argument is that women don't get placed on boards so easily in construction firms, forestry, mining/oil/gas, transportation and warehousing, utilities/manufacturing because these typically have only 20% and less of the workforce composed of women. Although one might argue that a woman who is able to rise in this male dominated industries would be a "shoe in" for a board position.

So, if you wanted to play the game, let each player choose what university qualifications they might seek, and then choose a card from the careers deck designating where they will be initially employed. 

Employment options (bottom to top) would include:

• construction
• fishing
• forestry
• mining/oil/gas
• transportation
• utilities
• manufacturing
• wholesale
• agriculture
• prof/scientific
• real estate
• arts, culture
• public admin
• retail
• food service
• finance
• education
• health care 

Some of these are not in either the S&P500 or the S&P/TSX. So, if a player drew down on one of these cards as a career, they would need to consider strategies to move onto the boards of a company which would be "listed|". 

So, there may be an info gap. Players will need to be familiar with the make up of certain sectors. 

How might the game be structured accordingly?? So, to a previous blog, you will need to pay close attention to your continuous learning strategy, what the needs of the sector are when it recruits directors and as a consequence, how you choose both a mentor and a sponsor. So, to win the game, you must play the long game.