Well done, guys! Thank you for organising this panel. Just two comments on the discussion based on recent discussions with friends and research: 1. The argument that gender inequality on industry sectors such as nursing and school teachers (ie female rep > male rep) - Recently, I read a study explaining that due to bias and stereotypes these are typically men's non-traditional career choices, specifically because are associated to “caring roles” which are traditionally considered female activities. So, the small male representation in those industries are (most of the times) not related to lack of opportunities but lack of interest instead or simply different careers choices. It is also shown in those studies that when men attempt to pursue those careers they are likely to be paid better and occupy leadership roles even when representing significant small proportion overall. 2. The concern about gender targets setting women for fail or being a strategy to underestimate or disqualify women. The fact is that bias are socially constructed and reflect our experiences, so what we see everyday when we go to work is what we understand as normal and typical (younger man in senior roles, man predominantly in leadership and manager roles). One way to deconstruct the gender stereotype is redefining “normal”. Having both woman and man holding leadership and senior roles in similar proportions will help to reprogram our bias. Mandated gender targets it is not about lowering the bar, it’s about forcing the organisations to look past their bias to identify competent women who, in a non gendered world, should have been hired or promoted on the basis of their achievements and competencies but haven’t been offered same opportunities to their male counterparts. It’s not only fair to those particular women but lifting those women up, to where they belong, helps to create a safe and less stereotyped environment and also create role models for other women who are aspiring leadership roles.
Great conversation. Thanks for sharing. Guy brings up twice throughout the session that each year they are having to re calibrate the gap. I really wanted to hear Guy talk about what they are proactively doing to educate those making the pay decisions so that an annual calibration isn't required in the future.
Well done, guys! Thank you for organising this panel. Just two comments on the discussion based on recent discussions with friends and research:
1. The argument that gender inequality on industry sectors such as nursing and school teachers (ie female rep > male rep) - Recently, I read a study explaining that due to bias and stereotypes these are typically men's non-traditional career choices, specifically because are associated to “caring roles” which are traditionally considered female activities. So, the small male representation in those industries are (most of the times) not related to lack of opportunities but lack of interest instead or simply different careers choices. It is also shown in those studies that when men attempt to pursue those careers they are likely to be paid better and occupy leadership roles even when representing significant small proportion overall.
2. The concern about gender targets setting women for fail or being a strategy to underestimate or disqualify women. The fact is that bias are socially constructed and reflect our experiences, so what we see everyday when we go to work is what we understand as normal and typical (younger man in senior roles, man predominantly in leadership and manager roles). One way to deconstruct the gender stereotype is redefining “normal”. Having both woman and man holding leadership and senior roles in similar proportions will help to reprogram our bias. Mandated gender targets it is not about lowering the bar, it’s about forcing the organisations to look past their bias to identify competent women who, in a non gendered world, should have been hired or promoted on the basis of their achievements and competencies but haven’t been offered same opportunities to their male counterparts. It’s not only fair to those particular women but lifting those women up, to where they belong, helps to create a safe and less stereotyped environment and also create role models for other women who are aspiring leadership roles.
Great conversation. Thanks for sharing. Guy brings up twice throughout the session that each year they are having to re calibrate the gap. I really wanted to hear Guy talk about what they are proactively doing to educate those making the pay decisions so that an annual calibration isn't required in the future.