Coaching Urged for Women (Executives)

Wall Street Journal ^ | APRIL 4, 2011 | JOANN S. LUBLIN

[reaganaut1]

Inadequate career development has kept women from reaching the top ranks of the corporate ladder, according to a report set to be released Tuesday by management consulting firm McKinsey & Co.

The report, which examines barriers to women's advancement in corporations, is primarily based on a 2011 survey of 2,525 college-educated men and women, including 1,525 individuals employed by large companies, mainly in management.

Despite efforts by major companies, just a handful of women have ascended to the leadership pinnacle, the McKinsey report concluded. Only 11 chief executives of Fortune 500 companies are women, down from a peak of 15 in 2010, according to a spokeswoman for Catalyst Inc., a nonprofit women's research group. There were two Fortune 500 female CEOs in 2000, up from one in 1995, Catalyst said in a 2000 report.

Similarly, the McKinsey study cited a 2010 Catalyst report that said 37% of lower-level and middle managers are female, while just 26% of vice presidents and other senior managers are women at Fortune 500 companies. McKinsey plans to release the results during a "Women in the Economy" conference sponsored by The Wall Street Journal in Palm Beach, Fla.

To crack the upper echelons of corporate America, McKinsey says companies must groom a deeper bench of female middle managers for advancement.

"By increasing the number of women who make it from middle management to the vice presidential level, corporations could vastly improve the odds for building diversity in top management," the report added. Even a 25% increase in the ranks of middle-management women reaching the next level "would significantly alter the shape of the pipeline," it said.

Joanna Barsh, a McKinsey senior partner who co-wrote the report, said companies need to spend more time coaching women and offering more leadership training and rotation through various management roles

[reaganaut1]

I don't seen any evidence in the article that women executives are being discriminated against.

"Women's groups" (I use quotes because the groups do NOT represent most women) and diversity-promoting consultants like McKinsey ultimate want quotas, just as "civil rights" groups want racial quotas.

I'd avoid hiring McKinsey if possible.

[traditional1]

There is ALWAYS the false premise used that it's not happening in "diverse" enough numbers, which assumes a target class of individuals WANT to move to the responsibility level, ARE QUALIFIED to rise to the responsibility level, and/or have the DESIRE AND WILL MAKE THE SACRIFICES NECESSARY to take on the next level of responsibility.

Trying to "look" diverse is worse than ACTUALLY PROMOTING THE MOST-QUALIFIED, REGARDLESS OF RACE, GENDER, OR AGE.

I always ran my businesses to create bottom-line, encourage innovation, and reward stellar performance....regardless of the above "diversity" factors....and it was before we were FORCED to meet quotas or be boycotted by racist and feminist dictators.

[freespirited]

I don't seen any evidence in the article that women executives are being discriminated against.

It's lost on these folks that most women have no interest in a CEO position.

As for who is being discriminated against, while there are individual exceptions, in my experience white males are the most likely to get unfair treatment.

[UCANSEE2]

I’ll ‘coach’ them, if I can go to the showers with them.

[wastedyears]

Why are they moving from ability to political correctness/affirmative action?

[Little Bill]

The worst, absolutely worst managers I have ever worked for were women, and of the people who worked for me the most troublesome were women. The one exception was an IT Manager from Texas she gave as good as she got and was a cute old gal to boot.

[Perdogg]

LOL!!! GMTA!

[antidemoncrat]

In the type of work I was engaged in, the women would not or could not do the same work as their male counterparts so as far as I’m concerned, news items like this are “boo hoo hoo” stories.

[T-Bird45]

I don't seen any evidence in the article that women executives are being discriminated against.

Quoting statistics = prima facie evidence of discrimination in some circles. Those circles would be those where emotions rule while logic and reason are foreign or sexist concepts.

[traditional1]

"and was a cute old gal to boot."

In TODAY's PC-World, you couldn't say that out loud in an office without some woman complaining about sexual harassment!

LOL

I remember when I had to replace my Secretary, and one of the candidates asked "what will you base your final decision on?".....and, back then, I said "it's gonna come down to the swimsuit competition...." (I had all of their secretarial skills test scores in hand, and was joking).

She just roared with laughter, and said "well, I'll keep looking, 'cause it won't be ME..."

[Little Bill]

My mother was an Executive Secretary at GE, the prime need is is a closed mouth and good organizing skills, she knew where all the bodies were buried and could make a curved line straight.

[IDontLikeToPayTaxes]

The worst, absolutely worst managers I have ever worked for were women, and of the people who worked for me the most troublesome were women.

My experience also.

[traditional1]

"she knew where all the bodies were buried"

LOL

That's true of most Executive Secretaries, and the good ones are really at a premium. It's one of the reasons WHY not a lot of average young secretaries are CAPABLE of handling that particular position and being reliable in it.