Why do I believe that Quotas are the answer (today)?
(this article was originally written in 2018)
When I created this blog, I knew there would come a time when I would discuss topics more polemic than others covered so far. Voila, today is that day. QUOTAS! This is a topic that I have wanted to cover for several weeks, but I delayed bringing it up as I did not want to be exposed to the possible criticism that the topic may bring when my blog was in its infancy. Now I have posted this article it cannot removed, but I could not postpone covering the topic for any longer.
Only yesterday I came across an article covering this issue written by the excellent Isabella Lenarduzzi . “Quotas are a medicine for a sick society”
She talks about Belgium, where the laws are different from France, but the problems are the same. Isabella refers to the NBB and the low number of women in governing bodies.
But the real interest in the article is to ask why does the topic anger some when the question is raised. As Isabella says very well and I will let her speak: "Does the quota system have a humiliating side for women, namely because they are women and not the recognition for their competency? Humiliating, no. Stigmatizing, yes. I know what I'm talking about as on many panels I am often the “quota woman”. Without the quotas I would not be invited. Quotas are a medicine for a sick society."
Am I in agreement with Isabella? Am I in favor or not of quotas? In order not to keep the suspense any longer, I'll admit that right now - I'm in favor of quotas - completely, 1000%, whilst dreaming that one day they will not be required.
In my first article I told how I was hired by Schlumberger at a time when they were not recruiting women. A few years later a parity policy was introduced. Moreover, the origin of this change is rather anecdotal. Indeed, it was the daughter of the CEO, who had just graduated, when she complained to her father of the sexism she encountered as part of her search for work. Her father, of course was angry at such discrimination. However, at the same time he wondered "but what about the company I run?” After checking, he was surprised to learn that less than 1% of those recruited by his company in field operations were women! He decided to change that and since he was a man of action, he wanted to change things quickly, so he put recruitment quotas in place.
The first argument of the people against quotas is: now they recruit women only because they are women! Yes and no. Yes, they are recruited partly for this - positive discrimination - but also and above all is because they have the required skills. A recruiter must do his job, which is to recruit the best possible candidate for the job, regardless of gender. A quota does not justify employing a person without qualifications, as this will be more of a source of trouble than anything else for his manager. The latter would come back to bite the recruiter. Young women straight out of university, motivated and qualified are available! Why would we not employ them?
领英推荐
So, quotas, what do they change? Quite simply, it obliges a company where women are not well represented to put in place policy to attract women. When you ask an 8-year-old girl what she wants to do later in life, there are few who would answer "field engineer on oil platform". Now a recruiter instead of rebuffing potential candidates, as was the case with me in 1989, must explain why the position is not suitable for her.
For a company to become more appealing, several methods exist. Primarily, (loudly) the message that women are welcome in the company. Invite women to universities, schools, recruiting events, conferences etc. to testify to the fact that this is a fantastic job, open to all. Have some female recruiters who have lived the experience and excelled. Who better for a young engineer to discuss with? As an example of progress, Schlumberger with its openness policy 10 years later recruited about 15% women as field engineers, and around 30% after 20 years.
What about when it comes to promoting an employee? It is the same thing. I often say, the position to be filled will not specify "women” as a prerequisite, because there is always a performance requirement that must be met. The best person for the position, regardless of gender. Quotas will simply force them to go for the "Talented-Silent" that I often talk about. Women who are not in the limelight or who do not dare to apply for a job they covet, even though they have the necessary skills. As an example: "The five potential replacements I have in mind are all men, yet with a quota I will look to see if I have missed any qualified females? Then the final choice is made with the most qualified person getting the position, regardless of gender, but at least we made sure that all possible candidates were evaluated. This may result in change, whereas before male managers were replaced by similar profiles, male, and where a woman would not have even been considered.
We do not have the choice. If we want to break the norms and if we really want things to progress, then the so-called "male" industries must attract more women. The only real way to see an evolution is to give stakeholders quantified goals.
Are women themselves against quotas? Yes, effectively. I hear colleagues say: “I do not want to be a quota woman”. Except that I do not believe that will be the case, for the reasons mentioned above. And when a woman thinks so, could it be because of some destabilization campaign, led by certain colleagues who don't look kindly on the feminization of their profession, is working well.
If you ask me the question: “Have I had positions due to being a woman?” Yes. In any case, at least one, my current job (This was written when I was Holcim Head of Health & Safety). My boss wanted a woman to kill two birds with one stone. 1-To have a qualified expert for the position. 2. Feminizing his line of management and thus taking a role model to support his action of diversity. Does this make my selection less justified? Absolutely not, it compensates for all positions that I or others have not had because of their gender.
In conclusion, to return to Isabella's article "Quota is a medicine for a sick society" - and like any medicine, it is a necessary, though not always pleasant, but it beats the illness. A drug that the industry must continue to take until it is eradicated. The day the number of women recruited in the industries will be satisfactory (I know, we could add a chapter on the definition of "satisfactory", but today I leave it to your discretion) - that day, everybody, with me first, will be very happy to stop quotas!
Sustainability Strategy and Innovation Professional | ex Accenture Strategy
1 个月As a human being, I am for quotas and agree that we need to force this change. As a strategist of liberal political denomination (in the European sense), I think such tools are counter-productive in the short term. It is one more reason for the right to shout anti-woke chants. Politics is upstream of anything else these days. And, politically we only have the short term, sadly. So I can't help but think we (the liberal left) need to get strategic and choose our battles more carefully. And one is reminded of the old political wisdom piece from Gandhi here, i.e. the means corrupt the ends. Just reflections, not hard convictions.
Social entrepreneur in Gender Equality, Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
1 个月Thank you, Magali, for taking a stand on this crucial issue that has ridiculously become so sensitive. Melinda Gates says "we are sending our daughters into companies created for our grandfathers". With women now accounting for 60% of university graduates, there can be no meritocracy unless women are fairly represented. It's not just a question of social justice, it's a question of performance and innovation. Nobody likes quotas, especially not the people who are supposed to benefit from them. But 20 years of research proves that without specific targets and accountability, no human group is going to change its habits and break out of its comfortable ??entre soi*?? * No better translation than ??stay among one’s peers??
Advocating for women in leadership | Consultant & Coach | Strategist - Marketing & People | Global Education Lead, Women on Boards Mentoring Programme
1 个月I had a conversation about exactly this on Friday with someone I'd just met. Of course, it'd be great if quotas weren't needed. But until the systems change, the opportunities/pathways/support/encouragement are equal and fair, and (more) people at the top change their way of thinking, then quotas are very much still needed to create diverse and inclusive workplaces. I thought I'd have seen more progression over the 20+ years that I've been working but it's been slow or backwards most of the time and 2025 certainly hasn't got off to a positive start either in this respect. ??