adminMaggie Mzumara
Even as we, as Zimbabwe, yet again joined the rest of the world this past Sunday, March 8, in celebrating the social, economic, cultural and political achievements of women, we note with regret that more still needs to be done and that there are some yawning gaps on leadership ladders across our country.
Only a few short weeks ago (last month, February) we yet again found ourselves with a newly appointed high-profile body with very few women on it. This time it was the Zimbabwe Mass Media Trust. Out of the six members appointed to the ZMMT only two were women. While we applauded the women who made it to this high-profile rung in the grand scheme of national leadership, the two appointments make a paltry 33 percent of appointments to that Trust. A far cry from what is desirous on the gender agenda. Less than the 50 percent mark stipulated by the provisions of our Constitution.
Trend repeats
What disappoints is not only that that there were much fewer women appointed in this particular instance but that this trend keeps repeating itself. Over and over again on boards, trusts, and other bodies set up in our country whether it in be in public office, politics, in C-suites in the corporate sector, in religious circles and others spaces of achievement and leadership. While at entry and middle levels of leadership, there are considerable numbers of women, granted, when it comes to apex level leadership, women are either nowhere to be found or too few and far between. Their numbers are disappointingly little.
Strength and productivity in diversity
The benefits of increasing the number of women in leadership positions have been well documented. Diversity at leadership level brings in the diverse strengths brought about by both genders. Women and men bring different characteristics and attributes to the leadership table. If harnessed properly, their different styles and contrasting strengths and weaknesses can be balanced out in such a manner that complementarity can not only exist but also enjoyed.
Further, there is evidence to prove that there can be more productivity where women have been co-opted into the leadership rungs. Research has found that, in the corporate sector for example, companies with strong female leadership has higher return on equity (ROE) than companies without, as well as a superior price-to-book ratio. Some recent research in the US has also pointed out that in companies in the top 20 percent of financial performance, 37 percent of their leaders were women, compared with 19 percent female leaders for companies in the bottom 20 percent.
Women have the numbers and the education
Generally speaking, women have the numbers. They make 52 percent of the population. And they have the education. At universities and other tertiary institutions there are almost as many women, and in some disciplines even more females than their male counterparts, undertaking the programmes and even graduating.
Yet as they progress in their careers and developments, they go missing. When some key appointments have been made either presidential, corporate or others, and there have either been no women at all or too few women, answers and explanations given have pointed to the non-availability, or more correctly non-visibility, of women to appoint.
The nature of the problem?
Why then is it that when it comes to certain key appointments there doesn’t seem to be a visible pool of women to pick from. What is it that women are seen as missing? Why do we not have a pool of abundant women to choose from?
The fact that only a handful of women are deemed visible or suitable enough to be appointed to certain key assignments does suggest a number of possible reasons:
That the available women are not visible enough;
That there is a general lack of pro-active consideration of females for major assignments;
That there is a reticence amongst senior men (and women) to mentor women at the leadership level; and among other reasons;
That there are certain qualities that are needed and looked for that women are being found wanting in or at
Possible solutions
Above scenario speaks to the burning need for a pipeline of talented, competent and qualified women eligible for leadership even at the very highest of levels to be deliberately created, filled, maintained, empowered, made visible and drawn from.
For this to occur there is need for the powers that be and other stakeholders to recognise the challenge of the absence of a recognised, visible and utilisable pipeline and establish accountability for fixing it.
What’s needed for the pipeline and how to make it work?
- Identify interested, available, talented, competent and qualified women for various positions in order to build the pool from. Such efforts should be wide-ranging, broad-based with inclusivity and diversity as the corner stones. A well publicised and accessible database of the same can be created.
- Cultivate necessary, requisite or extra skills — For those executive appointments needing perhaps some other peculiar attributes, disposition or inclinations such as political acumen and political savvy; or any other political capital or savvy.
It could also even be critical and strategic thinking as well as articulation and advanced communication skills that are needed. It is therefore necessary for stakeholders to ensure that such a breed of competencies and stock are cultivated among the womenfolk and that there be such ready and available in the pipeline.
Capacity building, confidence building and other development programmes must abound and made available and open as much as possible to all willing and capable. It is about availing and/or acquiring the right and necessary skill sets and tool sets. Because, honestly, the prevailing trends of too few women in key appointments can only mean that the calibre of appointees required by the appointer is being found lacking and wanting.
Yet we need women in these positions too and meeting the required criteria. A deliberate effort by stakeholders to have such a pool of women exist is imperative, otherwise outcries with no end in sight will continue.
- Appointers should look more widely and not recruit only those in their own image – there is strength and wealth in diversity and inclusivity.
- The gender lens should be applied to all types of appointments. Deliberate steps to identify and find from where they may be women to include appointments.
- Roles Build to fit —Some flexibility in role needs and construction is necessary. Roles should be constructed so that women get the exposure and experience and prove that they can handle it and challenge the default belief that women can’t do certain things
- Unconscious bias — Appointments are more often than not made based on underlying (cultural/societal) assumptions. These assumptions are often not based on facts, but they affect decisions. Unconscious bias pitted against women feeds on stereotypes that women are less, cannot be leaders and that generally do not belong at leadership tables. Once underlying assumptions that result in such bias are ferreted out, they can be tested to evaluate whether they are useful and accurate or whether they should be reframed. Gendered assumptions need to be uncovered, tested and reframed. Or discarded as necessary.
- Meritocracy to prevail — To top it all, once all above (and more) are considered, meritocracy should be what carries the day. Appointments based on merit are the best way of providing a fair chance.
Maggie Mzumara is a Media, Communication & Leadership Consultant. She is a strong advocate of women’s leadership and is founder of the Success in Stiletto (SiS) Seminar Series, a leadership development platform for women. She can be reached on [email protected] or followed on Twitter @magsmzumara
Online Reporter