Articles On Women’s Issues – Sign Up For Bain Insights Newsletter

admin    articles on women's issues     apple cider vinegar, chapped lips, makeup sponge, skin care tips, warm water rinse

If you get your treatment done from preissued list of doctors and medical centers, plan offers you a range of health benefits. For a ‘pre decided’ monthly fee.

Alternatively, you can also refer yourself outside plan and get some coverage.

With an indemnity plan option, pMO can be considered as one more sort of HMO. Notice, if you get outside doctor referred by ones covered in toplan, plan extends to give you coverage even outside HMO circle. Kory Elgar write about business, management and finances. And so it’s puzzling that women rate poorly on problem solving when men and women are believed to be equally capable at delivering outcomes. We suspect that women approach problem solving in alternative way, through collaborating and teaming, that is less gonna garner individual recognition and acceptance. Men don’t agree, that highlights a lack of shared understanding about challenges facing women aspiring to leadership.

Women do feel, however, that a lack of acceptance of various styles differentially affects them. That apparent gap in perceptions underlines difficulty in getting organisations to acknowledge and tackle complex pic of valuing diverse leadership styles. Basically the story appears to be a simple one. Notice, loads of senior promotion decisions are made by men, who are going to seek people more like themselves than not. It’s human nature for like to seek like. Eventually, women don’t typically fit bill they work differently, behave differently and are less comfortable promoting their ability. Whenever achieving gender parity remains a moral imperative rather than a financial one, until that happens. So there’re two factors that may explain disappointing lack of progress.

Only 55 per cent of men agree, nonetheless 76 per cent of women in study consider that gender parity can result in financial benefits for their organisations.

There’s a meaningful segment of business community that isn’t yet convinced of business case for change.

That suggests business case for diversity is still not well understood or accepted. Do women really perceive themselves as less competent, or do they simply feel they are unable to be as effective since their style isn’t as valued by most of their peers as men’s? We suspect tolatter. Women confirm to most worrying parts of their style, when ranking themselves on really similar leadership attributes. Of course, even if they are deemed to be equally as effective as men at delivering value for their organisations, women undersell their capabilities. Whenever raising an important question, for totop two leadership attributes problem solving and influencing women are 16 per cent and 40 per cent, respectively, less going to rate themselves as being as highly competent as men.

Second, implementing change is difficult.

It requires shifting underlying beliefs and behaviours.

These beliefs appear to be linked to differences in style. Challenging these beliefs will require a cultural change long period. Brutal fact is that barriers to women’s progression into leadership roles are in large part due to perceptions of a woman’s ability to lead. Flexible ways of working does not simply mean ‘part time’ career options at various stages in a career. You should take this seriously. It can mean allowing flexible start times, finish times and option to be your own boss at times. Allowing job to accommodate changing life demands can be a significant differentiator for companies seeking to attract male and female talent.

So there’re signs that Australian companies are making progress, at least at board level. While requiring companies to establish and report progress against gender diversity targets, have provided added focus and important motivation, women represent 26 per cent of recent board appointments in ASX 200 companies and 13 per cent of tal director positions up from 8 per cent in early 2010 dot 3 new guidelines from Australian Securities Exchange. With right degree of sponsorship and support, it also means ensuring that part-time employees are set up for success with meaningful and manageable roles, and by communicating success stories widely across toorganisation. That requires CEOs to create and communicate real proof points that flexible working models are viable and getting job done well is topriority, not having face time in tooffice.

Both women and men tend to agree that women are more effective at building teams and relationships with colleagues as well as at balancing family commitments. On dimension of working effectively in a team, about ‘onethird’ of women and men agree that women are more effective at it. Actually the bottom line is clear. Both deliver on job and make strong leaders, men and women are different. Now let me ask you something. How can we create an environment in corporate Australia that acknowledges and removes unintended bias embedded in torecruitment, promotion and appointment processes, and actively seeks to build cultures that celebrate different leadership styles?

Virtually, balance created by men and women working gether is powerful.

It enables chairs and CEOs to evaluate collective strengths and weaknesses across talent pipeline and in executive teams, and to identify where opportunities exist to increase leadership diversity and raise quality of collective decision making.

Defining model for good leadership can be powerful. Nonetheless, men readily acknowledge negative career consequences for women with competing family priorities and agree that it affects women more frequently than it does men, by two to four times. They consider that either a real or perceived lack of flexibility and commitment on their part is 13 times more going to affect their careers, and that having their role descoped while on parental leave happens 20 times more often to women.

Women agree wholeheartedly with that.

Attention to this issue pays dividends.

So study identified that 49 per cent versus 36 per cent last year of respondents believe their leadership team has made gender parity a visible priority and 40 per cent versus 30 per cent last year believe meaningful resources are committed to addressing these problems. Anyways, good news from 2011 research is that organisations are making progress. They are three or four times more gonna reckon that their organisation has sought broad input on root causes of gender inequality and has put real effort against this issue. Women who are promoters of their organisations as a great place for women to work are three to four times more likely than detractors to think that their companies’ leadership shows visible commitment to gender parity. We must create environments that embrace a spectrum of styles and working models. Fact, call to action is clear. You should take this seriously. Organisations will continue to lose potential and existing female leaders from their talent pipelines and miss opportunity to reap rewards of having a diverse leadership team, without that. On p of this, women and men are viewed as equally effective at delivering outcomes for their organization.

Whenever managing high pressure situations and delivering significant or transformative change, mostly there’s no gender difference in attributes similar to making commercially sound decisions. More important, we are talking about critical attributes that create value and drive results in organisations. Those who consider that differences in style limit a woman’s progression say that women are held back since they are different. These respondents list following factors as most important inhibitors of women’s advancement to leadership positions. These men should be those that have greater visibility or awareness of consequences of different styles on women’s progression. Seventyeight’ per cent of women in study are in this group, and they tend to be more senior women.

They see similar lack of progress for women but view underlying problems very differently.

39 per cent of men who agree with them tend to be board directors, general managers or work in smaller companies.

They believe shortage of women executives is explained by different styles and lack of appreciation for those differences by those who might promote them. Is it true that women have different styles? Nonetheless, to You should take this seriously. What are those styles, and what are consequences of different styles when promotion opportunities arise? Now regarding aforementioned fact… They have very different views of relative impact of style on any other’s careers, men and women do agree that they have different styles. Known men believe style affects both genders with similar frequency and, actually, say they are twice as likely as women to be overlooked for a promotion because of differences in their leadership or interpersonal styles. Actually, men tend not to recognise that having a completely different style is something that uniquely affects women.

Women feel that differences in style negatively impact their progression an average of seven times more often than men’s career progression. Men can’t see differences in style as a big issue that holds women back professionally. Men and women clearly agree that four highest ranking attributes of leadership are problem solving, influencing, team building and networking. You see, applying a research approach used by Catalyst9, we asked respondents to rank 10 leadership attributes in order that their organisations emphasise and reward. For instance, neither women nor men feel that style differences by either gender are embraced by their organisations. Anyway, that both women and men regard differences in style as career inhibitors for their respective genders highlights a much deeper issue around how diversity of all types is valued in organisations. There’s some more info about this stuff on this site. While dealing with these problems will require strong, committed leadership and sustained action long time to create an environment that values and promotes a spectrum of styles, flexible working options.

Cultural change can be initiated through a process of education, communication and training.

While helping them recognise stereotyping and showcasing successes of women leaders, especially their ability to be successful with a range of styles, with that said, this could include educating employees about business case for diversity.

Leadership training needs to allow both women and men to develop techniques to flex their style to improve their leadership effectiveness in a range of contexts. Thus if men in leadership prefer working with others whose style is similar to their own, it becomes challenging for a woman to convince her superior that she is right person for topromotion, So if women approach their work with a tally different style from most men.

Now look, the reality is that a woman’s approach to achieving these outcomes is less gonna be valued, even when women are deemed to be as capable as men at delivering outcomes.

Even with a strong, acknowledged business case for diversity, women find it ugh to break through these problems on their own.

And that’s heart of gender bias and makes it difficult for true meritocracy to exist. I know that the slow pace of change is confounding, with all focus on gender parity. Actually, we would have expected some upward momentum on perceptions of equal opportunity for women. There is no improvement in perceptions of a level playing field for women. Besides, the bad news is that a wide gap remains between intention and outcome. Virtually, there was a decline, and now only 15 per cent of women think that they have equal opportunity for promotion to senior management positions. Needless to say, seventyfour’ per cent of women and 76 per cent of men surveyed aspire to leadership roles. Oftentimes virtually, women and men do not have materially different levels of ambition. Normally, other good news is that women remain ambitious and aspire to leadership positions. You should take this seriously. We asked survey respondents to evaluate their own leadership effectiveness, as well as that of their female and male colleagues, intention to better case study from public sector demonstrates value of implementing those practices.

For around 20 years, Jennifer Westacott, now executive director of Business Council of Australia, was a public servant in Victoria and NSW.

Some very simple steps were taken, principally around removing structural biases in selection and recruitment processes. That said, for a considerable part of that time she held chief executive and similar senior roles. Selection committees were compelled to document how any candidate met tocompetencies, skills and criteria articulated for a particular position. Nonetheless, she observed that mostly there’re some important ingredients that have contributed to success of public service in promoting women into leadership positions. At their core, reforms were aimed at achieving a more capable, more responsive public sector. That said, this was done through a formal written application, an interview, assessment of a candidate’s proven experience, and structured referee feedback against requirements of a position. Now pay attention please. Did it work? Jennifer notes that while So there’s ain’t enough.

When they have competing career life demands, until these working arrangements become a more accepted and mainstream feature of working life, organisations will leak both male and female talent seeking other ways to manage ugh periods.

Employees have to see these models working, particularly for those identified as current or future leaders. Despite high interest shown in flexible work options, relatively few employees choose these options for fear that they will signal a career dead end. That said, that sheds some light on why women feel they do not have equal opportunity stark fact is women’s collaborating style ain’t perceived to be as effective as men’s promoting style. Our research shows that women are perceived to be less effective at leadership attributes that are most emphasised and rewarded by organisations. Therefore the issues of style and gender biases are a great deal more challenging to confront and resolve. It’s aintention to understand if your organisation is tackling totough problems. It will also require widespread acceptance and implementation of flexible career paths to gonna recommend their organisation as a place for other females to work. It’s a well while giving an average NPS of 28 per cent, in contrast, 22 per cent of women who believe style isn’t primary problem have a much higher degree of advocacy for their companies. Those who think that women’s competing priorities limit their progress feel strongly that women won’t reach leadership positions primarily because of challenges associated with juggling work and family, or being that women choose to prioritise a more balanced lifestyle.

These respondents listed following factors as most important inhibitors of women’s advancement to leadership positions.

Dozens of men are in this group that feels competing priorities limit women, and these men are predominantly in line roles.

They look at lack of women’s progress and attribute it to their female colleagues having multiple and confl icting priorities between work and family. In words of one female respondent. Of course, in contrast, only 22 per cent of women agree. Are men making valid assumptions about their female colleagues’ priorities and aspirations? That raises a question. These women are surely to be weighing up challenges associated with staying on a career track and having a family. There’s a lot more info about it on this website. It raises onus for organisations to demonstrate that flexible career paths are viable for all employees or face a potential exodus of their future female and male talent from their workplace. It’s a well-known fact that the juggling act of career and family can seem very tough, especially if organisational environment isn’t conducive to achieving that balance. Anyways, 22 per cent of female respondents who do consider that competing priorities is main inhibitor to progress tend to be more junior and slightly younger.

Now look, the research crystallises two key problems facing Australian business community with respect to helping women reach their full potential.

We need widespread acceptance and implementation of different ways of working to consider that they do not have equal opportunity for promotion into senior management positions, and half of men agreed with them dot 6 women are not strong advocates of their organisations to other women. Representation of women in senior executive positions within ASX 200 companies has not exceeded 13 per cent for last decade dot 4 A handful of companies, similar to MAp Airports, Pacific Brands and Austar United Communications5, have achieved gender parity, where women represent roughly half executive team. Look, there’re another 11 per cent that have critical mass where women represent 25 per cent or more of their senior executive team. So, 62 per cent of ASX 200 companies do not have any female senior executives.

Progress at senior executive level is less encouraging. While giving a NPS of 36 per cent, when asked if they will recommend their company to a female friend or colleague as a place to work, Net Promoter score 7 for women respondents was only 5 per cent, whereas men were more optimistic about women’s opportunities. Bain Company and Chief Executive Women have committed to work gether to better know the root causes and what companies can do to dramatically improve gender balance, intention to address that need. Whilst look, there’s a rich collection of anecdotal reports and opinion papers on gender diversity, we need hard data on problems that are getting in way of women’s progression.

If you enjoyed this article please consider sharing it!