More Women Need a Seat at the Table

Welcome to my newsletter. Consider this a collection of insights and ideas from myself and the team at CEO.works.?

It's 2022 and we are still discussing the need for gender equity across the organizational chart. We have indeed made strides and bounds of improvement in this field, but this progress strikes me as slow and not tracking with where we thought we would be ten years ago. I say this because it was around a decade ago when I visited INSEAD as Unilever's CHRO for a keynote discussion on the?leadership diversity puzzle ?at the 2009 INSEAD Leadership Summit.

During my tenure at Unilever, we invested in INSEAD to establish a research fund to study gender diversity in leadership. We deemed this to be an issue of particular importance. The reality then was that out of 1,000 graduates hired by Unilever, 55% were women. But that percentage declined over time as these employees entered leadership positions: women held only 8% of all senior leadership positions. Back then, I recall saying that If we could?only?solve the gender diversity issue in our business, our talent supply issues would be a long way in the direction of being solved.?

During this discussion, I shared the stage with Herminia Ibarra , the Charles Handy Professor of Organisational Behaviour at London Business School and the former Director of the INSEAD Leadership Initiative. During the Q&A session, someone asked her why we should consider gender in hiring for leadership positions when competencies always determine the hiring outcome. Her response was comprehensive and eloquent, with specific citations. The short answer (for the sake of this newsletter) was "intrinsic bias." Because women are perceived a certain way, and men another, and because we assign stereotypes based on gender, we must consider gender if we want equity in leadership. If you have 45 minutes to go down memory lane with me (and learn some timeless insights from Herminia Ibarra), I recommend you watch this video:?

Bridging the Gender Confidence Gap

It's no secret that intrinsic bias perpetuates the glass ceiling while it also elevates the "charismatic" or "visionary" leader stereotype, generally assigned to male leaders. Our firm's Co-Founder, Shefali Salwan , recently shared her thoughts on this topic in her article titled, "How to Bridge the Gender Confidence Gap." Here is an excerpt:

Research has established a clear gender difference in the assessment of talent in the workplace, where confidence (which men tend to display more of) is mistaken for competence.

In my experience in the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion space, and as a female professional, I have seen women asked to lean in more or portray themselves differently, more confidently (subtext: like men) to establish their credibility. These suggestions are both misogynistic and further perpetuate the stereotype. I believe there is an antidote that can more effectively and inclusively bridge this gap and ensure a high chance of success for companies, teams, and talent.

Becoming Aware of the Charisma Trap

We’ve been hiring talent for too long based on the candidates’ charisma and communication skills. Unfortunately, this practice tends to favor male candidates who are more often hired for their perceived capability based on their confidence rather than their actual accomplishments. This hurts both organizations and talent as value is washed away by having the wrong person in a critical role. Most hiring processes are not designed to dig deep enough to gather the right kind of information and background on a prospective hire and their history of success. In addition, hiring managers may not be trained to expertly extract the details needed to determine if the talent is just a skilled salesperson with a gift for storytelling or is a secret superstar who lacks the ability to self-promote.

There are numerous articles, books, and TED talks intended to help individuals learn the art of self-promotion, and many of them are designed specifically for women. But that solution creates several issues in the hiring process:

1.?It puts the onus solely on the talent and removes responsibility from the hiring team. This can cause exceptional talent to slip through the cracks.

2.?It asks women to behave more like men rather than allowing them to exhibit their natural leadership and problem-solving abilities.

3.?It can create an environment where the talent takes control of the interview to ensure it goes in the direction?they?want it to, rather than the direction it?needs?to go in to uncover the truth.

There are already too many incompetent leaders driving value and morale into the ground.

In my experience, there is a more effective way to ensure the right person is brought in to execute the ambition for the role, regardless of how dynamic, confident, or charismatic the talent may be.

Research reveals that the skills many leaders use to climb the corporate ladder, like narcissism, hubris, and charm, are the wrong skills we need to create an environment of growth, productivity, and fulfillment.

“…what it takes to get the job is not just different from, but also the reverse of, what it takes to do the job well.”

– Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic

How to Uncover the Truth

When conducting interviews to identify who is right for the job, how we ask the questions that get at role-talent fit is critical. I have heard executives talk about a “special trick” question that they use to truly discover the candidate fit. But we believe that it’s essential to base the interview on the outcomes and metrics for success for the role. We can’t identify star candidates if we don’t know what we’re measuring against.

At CEO.works, we call these metrics?Jobs To Be Done??(JTBDs). Once the JTBDs have been determined, the essence of the process uses one simple but precise question: Give us your best example of when you did [whatever JTBDs we’re looking for].

Hiring managers need the candidate to:

1. Explain the situation
2. Provide details about the actions they took
3. And reveal what the results were.

Now we have a way to begin matching experience to the JTBDs.

Of course, it’s easy for a skilled communicator to invent an impressive story. That’s why we ask for lots of context and have the talent walk us through the process. We ask them,?“What did YOU do,”?to uncover their behaviors & actions. We take our time here and ask the same question repeatedly in the same conversation. That way, there is less risk of distortion or exaggeration, and the interviewee must be specific.

It’s harder to invent an impressive story when we continue to press for details.

(You can read the full article?here .)

My wish is that we can continue this conversation to bring more diversity in leadership. I envision a world where we don't need to account for biases to bring a fully represented generation of leaders. For the women who have long contributed to the success of their communities. For my daughters, granddaughter, and yours. I know we can get there soon. Let's give more women a seat at the table.

I hope you are enjoying my newsletter. Feel free to leave me your feedback in the comments section below.

Follow us on: LinkedIn , Twitter , Instagram ,

Watch our videos on?Youtube

Visit our?website ?for more