Gender targets miss the mark for women in leadership
Listen to this article
Australian gender diversity experts are urging governments to rethink their approach to gender targets as new research shows that they do not lead to expected improvements in gender equity for women in leadership.
Examining the effects of gender targets in the Australian public service, researchers found that when gender targets were imposed, they didn’t always achieve their intended outcomes.
In Australia, women make up only 19 per cent of CEOs, and less than a third of key management positions (32 per cent). In the Australian public sector, women represent 60 per cent of the workforce, yet hold less than half of the most senior roles.
The study’s lead researcher says that it will take far more than just having gender targets to boost women’s equity in senior roles in Australia.
What the researchers say: “Women constitute the majority of the Australian public sector workforce, but their representation in senior roles is not proportional,” she explains. “Research shows that if we boost the number of women at executive levels, we increase the number of women in the ‘executive feeder’ levels below. We often refer to this as the ‘trickle-down effect.’” This has been noted in many other countries, not just Australia.
“It seems logical that gender targets would increase this positive effect, yet when we explored this across multiple public service departments, we found that trickle-down effects were inconsistent across departments,” she concluded.
The researchers said that while gender targets may be well-intended, without the right combination of evidence-based practices that can support a ‘trickle-down effect’ and, importantly, a Chief Executive who can visibly drive change, targets may be ignored or ineffectively implemented.
“The Chief Executive must be on board to champion gender targets. Strong support from the top, a ‘loud’ voice that supports change, and an open approach to addressing resistance to change, are vital,” they added.
“Gender parity also relies on having the right practices in place – at least two women on shortlists helps increase female representation in senior roles, and leadership training supports women progress through organizations. Some of these important practices were not in place in the departments where targets were not working,” the lead author commented. “Targets must be supported by both the right practices and a Chief Executive who is an internal gender champion. When leaders demonstrate support of women in leadership, they create the right environment for change. But, even with the right mix of practices, if these are not consistently supported across all levels of the organization, gender targets will fail.”
“Any commitment to gender equity requires focus, but when gender targets are lost in government strategic plans that include up to 100 targets – including multiple gender targets – it will be hard to achieve consensus about which target to prioritize,” the researchers said. “Accountability is needed for achieving gender targets – real accountability, with teeth.”
So, what? Alicia and I have had doubts about gender targets for some years. For one thing, gender differences at the executive level—and at crucial levels below that where change, adaption and creativity are essential—do not necessarily lead to cognitive differences—differences in outlook, assumptions and mindset.
Having more women—and minorities—at decision-making levels in organizations is a social benefit. Their being there has a multitude of advantages. But it is equally important that they come from a variety of backgrounds and experiences and that they’re given the safety needed to challenge the status-quo.
Join the discussion
More from this issue of TR
Are you chasing your dreams or running from your fears?
Personal awareness of what drives us to achieve the things that matter is a critical step in protecting mental health.
Gender targets miss the mark for women in leadership
Without the right combination of evidence-based practices that can support a ‘trickle-down effect’ and a CEO who can visibly drive change, targets may be ignored or ineffective.
You might be interested inBack to Today's Research
Are leaders born or bred?
New research refutes conventional wisdom that says leaders are made through childhood experience and achieve their hierarchical position largely through chance.
Artificial intelligence can help some businesses but may not others
The temptation for businesses to use artificial intelligence and other technology to improve performance, drive down labor costs, and better the bottom line is understandable. But before pursuing automation that could put the jobs of human employees at risk, it is important that business owners take careful stock of their operations.
Have more women on boards to ensure consumer safety
Boards that include women may be more responsive to a diverse set of stakeholders, including at-risk customers. Boards do not make the recall decisions, but instead they set the tone and expectations for how managers are to make these decisions.
Join our tribe
Subscribe to Dr. Bob Murray’s Today’s Research, a free weekly roundup of the latest research in a wide range of scientific disciplines. Explore leadership, strategy, culture, business and social trends, and executive health.