France's Finance Minister Christine Lagarde, 55, has been named the first woman to head the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
The reason I am disseminating this piece of news is not because Europe once again rules the IMF like they have been doing for the past six decades. I don't have anything against that since I believe they're finance ministers are qualified for the job. What I would like to highlight though, is that she is the first woman to hold this post, and that she got there all on her own.
She was the finance minister for France even before the ridiculous law stating that women must make up 40% of all corporate board members. She didn't need a law to get her a job. She got there because she was good enough at what she did to make people put their trust in her.
On the 27th of June, the Malaysian Cabinet approved of the new policy ensuring that there must be at least 30% of women in all corporate boardrooms, as can be read in the article Malaysia mandates 30 pct women representation in corporates' boardroom-level posts.
I won't berate the Malaysian Cabinet for this because it's just doing what the rest of the world is (because Malaysia is like that mah - jumping on the bandwagon and having to copy standards - albeit a couple of months late, as always). But is this not a backlash against the battle for women's rights? I am disappointed with this measure as a step towards what they claim is upholding women's rights. I personally don't think the way to make the males of the corporate world listen to the ladies, give the a shot to prove their mettle and contribute more significantly to business is to mandate their presence in the boardroom. Just because there are however many percent of women there doesn't mean they're going to be heard.
Now, I'm not trying to say that men never listen to women in all corporate boardrooms, but I would like to think that women were given a position on boards because their actual capabilities are being recognized, and not because the law requires them to be there. I'll admit that boards may still be heavily lacking in women and that men would still consider themselves to be alpha males and may never recognize women as their equals, but I think that a woman's merit should be enough to get her on a corporate board and if a company is lacking in outstanding women, then so be it that you do not have 30% of women on the board of directors. I think that to mandate the percentage of women in corporate companies is good enough to support the fair representation of women in the corporate sector.
And even if you say that women do need legislation to battle for their rights, I agree with Edward Lawler (Lack of Women on Coporate Boards: The Problem or A Symptom?) that what would really move a company forward is more diversity and a different outlook instead of more female brains, although women may provide that breath of fresh air in a boardroom of men. The thing is, your gender does not determine the direction of your train of thoughts. Just because a person is a woman does not necessarily mean she has that creative edge to move a company forward, the same going for men.
But all in all, this is just an opinion; defendable, but not necessarily right. Well, nothing is ever right, I think. It's all a matter of how many people you can convince to make this their truth.
This calls for...a debate! :D
No comments:
Post a Comment