What to avoid...perhaps!
There are a few industries women may want to avoid, if they are looking to become corporate directors. Its something of a chicken or an egg. Are women not chosen to be on the boards of corporations in these sectors because there are no qualified women to choose from? Or, do women not go into these sectors because there are no women who might be mentors or sponsors who will help them advance? Or, do women not get the opportunity because, proportionately, there are too few women in the pipeline?
What are these sectors, typically?
- Construction. Women comprise less that 10% of the workforce.
- Fishing, hunting, trapping. About the same as construction.
- Forestry and logging. ditto
- Mining, oil, gas. Women comprise about 20% of the workforce.
- Transportation. Women comprise about 22% of the workforce.
- Utilities. ditto
- Manufacturing. ditto
- Wholesale trade.Women comprise about 30% of the workforce.
- Agriculture. ditto.
When designing a board game, players may be asked to draw a profile card at the beginning of the game. Such a card may define one of the limitations that she will face as a consequence of a particular career choice.
On the other hand, as noted in a previous post, she may draw a card where the pipeline to the board is rich (er) with opportunity. So, a career in health care, education, finance/insurance, accommodation/food service, retail trade, public service (administration) where the pipeline is richer, the chances of finding a sponsor or mentor greater, and a chance to compete on a level playing field (or even one tilted in her favour) will make the rise to the top easier.
The final complicating factor for the game is choosing a company that is listed on either the S&P 500 (where women are more likely to get a seat on the board) or the S&P/TSX where women are less likely to get a seat on the board. This will be a factor on the profile card that the player will choose during the game.
Building the Game
Games are easier to start than to finish. With this caveat, I am beginning the (long) process of building board game.
Background
Over the last 2 months, I have presented:
- Issues and challenge women face when they strive to secure a position as corporate director;
- Those criteria for success/victory have been outlined;
- The key characteristics of companies and sectors which aid a woman's successful appointment as a director or, conversely, will contribute to her likelihood of failure in her quest for a directorship;
- Components of (N. Am.) society which have been set forth and which contribute to, or which may limit a woman's successful achievement as a board member;
- Networks which will help women succeed;
- Career steps which women might take to realize their corporate successes;
- Academic strategies which women might employ to better improve the chances of success.
Game objectives
This game should be designed to be educational. So, it would be about:
- those gender biased impediments confronting women in their quest for a corporate directorship;
- how to cooperate with like minded women to succeed;
- what strategies a woman might employ to succeed even despite considerable gender biased challenges; the potential consequences of certain life, academic and career paths, chosen or imposed.
The game should promote a conversation about issues and options when the players are not playing the game.
Advancement in the game is achieved by:
- mastering each of 4 levels including academic, early career, mid career and C-suite levels;
- creating strategies and relationships to advance through each level;
- outsmarting other players as needed;
- cooperating with other players o advance your own objectives or their, when feasible;
- overcoming certain gender biased issues.
"Group" is an important feature of this game, as is "healthy" relationship building. So, 4, but preferably 6 players are best for this game.
Each player will draw a "profile" card to begin the game. This card will describe academic credentials, economic status, and ...?. The goal of the profile card will be to establish early, that the competition is played on an uneven playing field. So, some players will appear to be "handicapped" at the beginning...although the "handicaps" can be turned to advantage during the game.
Narrative Reporting and NBPSPP
The Board of the NBPSPP currently sends out quarterly newsletters to retirees, holds an annual meeting open to retirees and conduct it on line, so that those who cannot attend in person, can participate. For each of its last 3 annual meetings, there has been an element of education for the retirees about some element of pension rights or governance. Questions may be, and are , posed by the audience.
However, it is important to consider what the backdrop to these open meetings are, or ought to be. In effect, the retirees ought to hear from the board about the conduct of business from the perspective of the code of conduct and ethical practice.
- a comment about the conflict of interest policy, published in the annual report and in one of the newsletters, needs to be made. Were there any conflict of interest issues? Wee these addressed? How? Did the Auditor identify any?;
- an assurance of that the assets of the Plan were properly used, following the Plan's principles of social responsibility and ethical investing;
- an assurance that our confidential information was protected and that there are IT guidelines and practices which continue to be evaluated;
- fair dealing is a practice;
- there is compliance with not only regulations governing pension plan management but also governance . Further, an assurance ought to be provided that there is a continuous effort to use governance best practices;
- there is whistleblowing protection.
In the narrative and ongoing communication with retirees, typically there is an expectation that emerging trends are reviewed, together with a conversation about how the Plan is responding to these. A few of these trends include:
- increased government scrutiny of (pension) board functioning;
- greater stakeholder activism;
- more innovation in reaching out to stakeholders
- more communication between independent directors and stakeholders;
- an expectation that retirees will monitor board as well as plan and management performance;
- compensation will be based on performance
What are our expectations???
Indeed...what are they as far as fair dealing and openness are concerned?
We have a right to expect:
- accountability from the Board of Directors;
- openness in communication from the Board;
- enhancement of the plan's value and its benefits;
- protection of the plan's assets;
- having assay in the governance of the plan;
- mitigating risk;
- being treated fairly
What further expectations do we have?
As retirees we have certain expectations of our Board which they would need to report, either through the annual report, the annual meeting, a quarterly newsletter, periodic meetings between independent board members and retirees, a web site. These accountabilities include:
Board oversight of management in :
- strategy development-what is it?
- risk definition and management
- Performance appraisal of management and the board
- compensation based on performance
Board reporting through such independent committees as Audit, Compensation, Nominating. Further, in addition to financial reporting, there should also be reporting regarding social responsibility and ethical investing.
So, what are our legal rights and how do we get the Board to respect these??
