Gender Diversity and a Dirty Little Secret |
 |
November 13th, 2007 -- by Harleen Kahlon
While writing my business plan for DamselsInSuccess, I spoke with a number of HR managers to get their thoughts on a job board just for women. The conversations were helpful, but mostly because they confirmed what I suspected — although gender diversity was valued and sought after, most RCs felt that attracting women remained a challenge, and that they could benefit from additional tools towards that end.
There was however, one conversation in the bunch that was memorable. An RC at a major investment bank intimated a dirty little secret. According to her, the instruction from above to bring in more female candidates really was nothing other than a directive to *publicly give the impression* that the company was interested in bringing in more female candidates. In other words, it really didn’t matter if the representation of women at the company actually improved as long as it looked like the company undertook efforts to try to increase that representation.
There’s no way to know if the RC’s understanding was accurate or not, but I’d bet it was — I can see how companies could think that sponsoring diversity conferences would be sufficient to qualify themselves as women-friendly, even in the absence of other, more targeted efforts to recruit women such as hosting events for women at schools, or hiring consultants to understand women’s needs and then instituting policies to meet them.
But, companies that take this approach — focusing on image over results — are not actually women-friendly and are just good at convincing themselves (and potential hires) that they are. Many women today ask tough questions, either when they’re interviewing or later, when it’s time to make difficult decisions about balancing work and life. Somewhere down the road, a company’s short-sighted approach to enhancing gender diversity will catch up with it, most likely in the form of costs associated with attrition and perhaps more importantly, in the form of losing the unique talents that women bring to the table.
I’ll save the list of reasons why women should be coveted by employers for another post since, for now, I just wanted to hear reactions to the RC’s view from the Cheezhead audience. As the founder of a site for professional women, and as a professional women myself, I found the attitude problematic. What do you think? Is it a quick fix to a challenge that many companies face? Is there some wisdom to it that I have missed? I’d like to hear your thoughts…
November 14th, 2007 at 8:24 am
ahhhh, the dilema of creating a true culture of diversity vs. a quota-driven facade common throughout corporate America.
In my experience, the attitudes and comments you’ve encountered can be attributed to resentment of AAP compliance programs put in place by organizations in order to meet the requirements of an outdated Executive Order (not a law, mind you, but an Executive Order).
It seems to me that many organizations hiring and development programs are being pulled in 3 distinct directions.
1. Compliance
2. Hire and promote the most qualified individual
3. Build a culture of respect and diversity
This lack of clarity and purpose has the potential to create friction and resentment in individuals and even throughout organizations.
Good, thought-provoking questions, by the way.
November 14th, 2007 at 1:59 pm
It’s sad, that just when you thought you were in the 21st century, you read this and realize there are still people struggling to pull you back to the 18th century. I wish I could say there was a quick fix. However, when I joined my prior employer, to lead recruitment of sales professionals, their sales force was almost entirely male. The common misconception that had permeated the company, was that since the sales took place in plant enviroments, and were often dirty, women would not want to do the job, so there was no reason to actively recruit women. I asked for the opportunity to prove that belief wrong, was given it (with full expectations that I would fail, and get knocked off of my high “progressive” horse), and proceeded to actively seek out female candidates. By building a strong value proposition based on a strong merit based advancement system, flexible hours, freedom from micromanagment, and compensation based on results, we were not only able to quickly infuse our sales and sales management ranks with high caliber female recruits, but over the next two years we noticed an amazing trend, not only did females thrive, but they excelled.
The point of that longwinded story, is that you cannot flip a switch to change peoples perception (although you have to think, the flip has been switching long enough), but for companies that still don not get it, it will take some one with courage of convictions to prove the misguided convential wisdom wrong.
Harleen, I wish you the best of luck with your new venture. I look forward to hearing more about it, as I feel that my current employer could benefit from a tool that would let us reach out directly to female candidates.
Thanks and have a great day,
Jim
jmdcomedy@yahoo.com
November 19th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
I have had first hand experience with this “diversity initiative”.
I work as a Career Services Advisor for a private college and routinely receive eployment opportunities from local companies. Nearly every one of these companies proudly proclaims their status as an “equal opportunity employer” but one company in particular goes above and beyond. Every mailer they send includes an official letter detailing how dedicated they are to seeking out female candidates. They go so far as to insert a self addressed post card for me to sign and send back. It proclaims they have made every effort possible to recruit females and that I have been made aware of the opportunity.
I find this deeply offensive. If they were sincere in seeking out qualified candidates then the number of women working for them would surely speak to this. The fact that they need to document the effort says it all.