Black Sabbath and the Bake-Off

-->

This may be the first time anyone has seen Black Sabbath and Mary Berry together in the same sentence.  Crazy perhaps -  but in my daughter’s life they are the most natural of bedfellows.

She represents a new generation – freed from the rules that I had at her age which still clung to our grandparent's views hanging over from the war.  My 21 year old is that rare thing – a female engineer .  And that alone is something to celebrate.

Her life isn’t easy.  She works hard – far harder than I did at her age.  She is growing up without certainty of employment – the shadow that hangs over this generation of which we were blissfully unaware.  But she has the freedom to mix it up in a way I don’t remember us having – whether due to ignorance or a lack of imagination. 

She relaxes with an evening of heavy metal – spending all her spare cash on gigs watching bands that I thought were already dead – Iron Maiden, AC/DC (but no, they are all back on tour and still alive), or with titles that make you feel faintly sick (Slayer, Megadeath), or are just plain weird.

The head-banging, brownie-baking engineer

But once the hangover has worn off, she indulges herself with her other hobby – baking.  Her role model is the septuagenarian Mary Berry – she asked for a food processor for her 21^st birthday – and she told me last week she  made bread, despite having an oven in her student house slightly less effective than a calor gas stove.

This generation of women won’t have to be told to lean in.  They’re making up their own rules.

As women increasingly outperform men, is feminism becoming irrelevant?

For many years the idea of feminism and equality have been largely synonymous.  Indeed Wikipedia defines a feminist as someone one who “advocates or supports the rights and equality of women”.

In an excellent recent  article, Spectator Editor Fraser Nelson  suggested that this concept is coming apart.  He opined that with the success of young women at all levels of education and in the workplace, we may be seeing a long term trend where the ‘British economy will become feminised and utterly transformed’.  As well as outperforming boys in at school, girls are now the majority of University graduates and women in the 22-30 age- bracket are paid more than their male equivalents.



Generation Y - adjusting to a feminised world from an early age

It is reasonable to assume that  these young women might wish to settle down and have children with men their intellectual and social equals, but if this trajectory continues there will not be enough suitable men  to go round. Successful women will be faced with the choice of either not having children or “trading down” to find a father for their children.   This raises the interesting prospect of the equality debate going the other way.

Throughout my 25 years in the PR industry, women have always greatly outnumbered men in all levels below the Boardroom where the relationship is almost completely inverted. 

The  industry is typically almost entirely a graduate profession and remains a very popular choice with high performing graduates.  When I ran H&K we had hundreds of highly qualified applicants for our graduate entry scheme often with two or more degrees , several languages and various exotic hobbies to hire from.  And all that for 18 grand a year. So our industry should be a leading indicator of the trend Nelson is identifying.

Rather depressingly, over my quarter century the paltry amount of senior women seems to have barely shifted.  We have hardly been standard bearers for the equality agenda – let alone a feminist one.  Maybe these women could afford not to return to work after having children.  Or perhaps their husbands were not prepared to face the perceived stigma of being the primary child carer.  My experience (primary bread winner, flexible supportive husband) was rare ten years ago when we decided to role reverse.  It felt like a difficult choice for us both.  Now society seems much less judgemental ,  and I am happy to see far more couples making this choice. 

But logically, despite the carnage of the child bearing years which typically see a worrying chunk of talented women leave the industry, the preponderance of bright motivated  women who either have no children or who are the primary bread winner should lead to at least equality in the boardroom.   It will be interesting to see whether if  in the next 10-15 years women reach the top of the industry to the degree that their number and talents deserve.  And on their own terms, not solely by making typically 'male' choices.  If so, we will not really have moved at all on the feminist agenda, although the equality debate may be deemed to be over.

Snoozing into the Boardroom– can we really nap our way to work life balance?

Zen to zzzz... finding balance can be hard

They say be careful what you wish for.  I started this blog partly because I didn't think there was enough debate about some of the practical reasons why women weren't making it into senior roles.  I clearly started a trend - every Sunday the newspapers feature another book,  survey or a conference asking questions and proposing solutions.

One of the latest is from Arianna Huffington who recently held an event in New York exploring the need for the Third Metric – which she defines as a third way of measuring success in the workplace that better suits work life balance.  The first and second are our old friends power and money and she describes this third metric as 'the pursuit of wonder and wisdom'. Seriously? Who signs up to a session helping exploring ’wonder’?.  But the Wellness and the Bottom Line session did catch my eye. 

It was led by clinicians describing the stress we put our bodies under as we juggle to ‘have it all’.  The juggling that we think is a sign of how organized and productive we are actually means having our ‘flight or flight’ responses permanently switched to ‘on’ .  Evolution has meant that we can’t distinguish between running way from a mammoth from crashing through a pile of email while doing the Waitrose order and monitoring the packed lunches.  Our bodies don’t know they’re different and they don’t vary our response.  They just keep us highly stressed to cope.

This is bad for us whether we realize it or not.  All that adrenalin all stored up with nowhere to go can lead to heart problems, high blood pressure, weight gain, you name it.

Poolside naps - double the benefit?

The cure happily seems to be more sleep and more vacations.  And resetting our success measures so that we don’t think a good day is one in which we juggled three more things than we did the day before without keeling over.  Apparently Americans – who seem to get tiny amounts of vacation by European standards – failed to take on average nine days of it last year.  By my calculations that’s nearly half.  I don’t think we’re quite that bad here judging by the queues down the A3 heading for the coast at the slightest glimmer of sunshine, but it’s a worrying trend.

As for sleep, another British survey published recently said that over two thirds of us get seven hours or less a night.  I am a reformed sleep deprivation addict. When I was running a large company I used to get by on around six hours a night.  This went on for several years – and I eventually worked out that at that rate I was missing one night's sleep a week.  Imagining missing one day’s food a week? (actually that might be good for me…).

I read that as you get older you need less sleep.  That might be true in your eighties, but I am making up for lost time.  I try to sleep eight hours a night for the first time in my adult life.  Makes you feel great, its free and you can do it anywhere.  Not many things you can say that about. 

The ambition gap - can it ever close?

The last week has brought inevitable reflection on Margaret Thatcher's role as a role model for ambitious women wanting senior leadership roles.  Some criticised her, pointing to a lack of policy initiatives giving ordinary working women a helping hand to follow her example. Famously she never put herself forward as a feminist - instead she tended to present herself as someone who just wanted to do the job and was prepared for the trade-offs that this brought.  And she said many times that if it hadn't been for Dennis she would never have been able to do her job.  

I was a 'child' of Thatcher - when I was getting married and starting my career she was an apparently unassailable presence.  I don't remember then seeing her as a role model per se - rather thinking she was a one-off, a force of nature.    

One word repeats itself in the obituaries and comments.  Ambition.  Clear and unapologetic.  We might not like to admit it, but the evidence is clear that women find it significantly harder than men to identify with the idea of success. And that leads to an 'ambition gap' which plays a significant role in keeping women out of the top jobs.

According to a Harvard Business Review study, 48% of men describe themselves as ambitious against only 35% of women and further only 15% of women aspire to positions of power as opposed to 27% of men.  I wonder if the use of the word 'power' is part of the issue here -less than a third of men feel comfortable saying they actively want it.  There is a deep-seated belief amongst women which I think is introduced from childhood that actively wanting power is unattractive and unladylike and thus not associated with reward or pleasure.

I think this a tricky issue to address - really we need to find new ways for ambitious women to express their ambition in language with which makes them comfortable and confident. 

When I looked into it, this goes deeper than I thought. I am an avowed follower of Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus, (if you have somehow never read this - do - one of the most useful books you'll every read).  So I was very interested in some research in the US showing the impact of this hard wiring in the workplace. ‘Women Don’t Ask’, a report by Babcock and Laschever, shows how sex differences in earnings emerge soon after graduation from university because young men routinely negotiate higher starting pay while most young women fail to do so. In surveys, when asked to pick metaphors for the process of negotiating men picked “winning a ball game” or a “wrestling match” while women picked “going to the dentist”. These differences in approach develop over time into a substantive earnings gap – even among people who went to the same universities and have the same qualifications, including MBA graduates.

We see a similar trend here in the UK - research from the ILM shows that women's lack of confidence comes through in their more cautious approach to applying for jobs  or promotions: 20% of men will apply for a role despite only partially meeting its job description, compared to 14% of women. Climbing the career ladder is notoriously competitive, and women’s hesitation in applying for more challenging roles inevitably puts them at a disadvantage.

Rather than pretending this doesn't exist, I hope women can take more time to understand - and accept - why they are wired in a certain way - knowledge is power and once you know why something happens, you can take steps to change the outcome.

Get me to the church on time

I heard the wonderful Helena Morissey on Women's Hour this week talking about the secret of her success.  She said it was having a supportive husband explaining in a matter of fact way that her husband liked taking care of the family and she liked going to work.  Her directness was very appealing. Her comments come on the back of Helen Fraser, the CEO of the Girls' Day School Trust who talked about the need to raise awareness with girls that if they want a career they need to pick the right husband.  Not just one who will 'do the dishes' but one who will genuinely support them in their career ambitions. Vicki Woods wrote a great article expanding on the theme in The Telegraph.


I couldn't agree more - and in my experience it's not just about choosing a partner with the right attitude, but also trying to find them when you are reasonably young.  I have always felt that a key factor in my ability to be a successful CEO was my decision to get married and have both my children before I was 30. 

There is strong evidence that one of the reasons women are failing to make it into the most senior positions is because they lack a strong partner to help them.   And this is partly because they wait until they are in their thirties or later to settle down and start to have children.  Not only does this mean that their childbearing years will coincide with exactly the time in their career when they are at the tipping point for breaking through the glass ceiling, they are trying to do two incredibly difficult things at once - progress up the corporate ladder whilst working out the rules for a happy balanced family life.

Today  the average age women get married is 33.  I was 26 which seems alarmingly early now- even then I was the first of my friends to trip down the aisle. 

For many years I felt the odd one out.  During my thirties, everyone I knew was moving into glamorous houses and taking three holidays a year. On the other hand, we were living in the same house and embracing Key Camp holidays for the family rather than hitting the slopes at Val d'Isere. As my children went to secondary school my contemporaries were going on maternity leave.  I wondered if I'd missed out on the great secret that everyone else knew.

And one day it all made sense. At the age of 40 I was asked to  become a CEO.  I didn't immediately accept  - I was worried about the impact it would have on family life. After much discussion, my husband Richard decided he would give up his job to take care of the children.  That meant I could go into the role with no strings attached, from day one. It's a tough call but one that more and more men are making.  I can't find any statistics on men as primary carers, but almost all senior women I know do have a partner who is the primary carer for the children even if he doesn't give up work completely.

So my advice is to start thinking about finding the "one" and having children in your mid-late twenties.  There's no evidence it leads to more divorce - spikes seem to come from either very early or second marriages. And I'm please to see my view on this point at least chimes with that of US blogger Penelope Trunk  - a great read if often controversial.

Lean In Sheryl - relax and take some credit

Unless you've been living in a cave you can't have missed the launch of the Facebook COO's new mandate for social change.  Her guide is billed as a practical guide for women to balance a successful home life, motherhood and a seat in the boardroom.

Sheryl looks tense - and no wonder - that perching on the keyboard look is notoriously hard to pull off.  FB too cool for chairs? (Picture copyright The Times)

I should canonize her.  I have set myself almost exactly the same goal.  So why do I feel a bit reluctant to praise her to the skies?

Many people have criticised her for not representing a realistic role model. The assertion is that with millions in the bank and an alpha woman lifestyle -  no 'normal' woman can expect to follow her advice.   But I think this is unfair.    She seems aware that she will be accused of not representing 'real' women, but she is doing her best to encourage real change using the advantages she has.

I like her honesty.  She admits she wants to be liked too much - apparently Zuckerberg told her this would hold her back.  When I suggested finding a man to coach you, I didn't have the wunderkind in mind but if it works - fine.  I recommend finding your husband young - and she agrees, albeit hers is a Silicon Valley CEO.  She firmly encourages women to speak up for themselves and not to fear accusations of bossiness.  I'm on board.

My only problem with "Lean In" is a vague but pervasive sense that it's too managed.  Too manicured.  Her conference room at Facebook is called "Only Good News".  Her "Lean In" Groups are told firmly only to feature positive stories and upbeat messages. She looks tense in the publicity shots - perhaps too worried about criticism.

Sheryl - have confidence.  Relax and lean in to the debate.  Don't worry about making it all positive - use your platform to encourage women from all walks of life to take what they find useful from your book without feeling they need to join a movement.
 

Can more senior women spearhead growth?

It is often said that we need more women on Boards because women's leadership skills are precisely what is needed to help the economy back to growth.  Not much has been written about precisely why women can make a specific contribution to recovery.  Is it just that we are all so disappointed with the reality of post bubble lifestyles that we'll try anything to restore some confidence? That sense that it can't get any worse, surely if more women were in charge things might improve and anyway what have we got to lose? 

I figured there might be something to this and there might be something in the idea that women and men have some clearly differentiated leadership characteristics and that more of the female and less of the male might be just what we need to dig us out of this flat lining era.
 


There is certainly good data that companies with more women on boards perform better financially.  This is the main genesis of the Davies Report which looks at the UK and is also commented on by US  women's coach Lynne Morton.  In her blog here she points out that Fortune 500 companies with a higher percentage of women officers experienced, on average, 35.1% higher return on equity and 34% higher return to shareholders;  Fortune 500 companies with more women board directors outperformed others by 53%  (Catalyst, The Bottom Line, 2002 and 2007). 



On the face of it, it seems hard to understand why companies aren't rushing towards talented women begging them to take senior roles. Or why two years after launching his report, Lord Davies is still saying that he thinks the UK will be doing very well to hit 25 per cent of women on Boards by 2015. It's currently at 17 per cent after a year of high profile campaigning. The situation is very similar across Europe with around 11 per cent of Board seats going to women - a position which has been fairly static for some years.
  

Perhaps people don't believe the data because they don't understand how it happens.  There isn't a great deal written on this but Mckinsey have done a fascinating series of reports trying to understand why an increase of women on boards seems to have such a dramatic increase on business performance. They asked men and women around the world which leadership traits were most important after the crisis. The ability to inspire by providing leadership and vision came top followed by setting expectations and connecting these clearly to rewards.  In both cases their modelling shows that women outperform men in these areas.


Despite this and much other similar data, men remain to be convinced.  In a global McKinsey study just over half of men surveyed said they didn't believe more women on boards led to greater returns.  And just as surprsingly perhaps only three quarters of the women believed the data. It is hard to think of other areas where beliefs and behaviour consistently fly in the face of the data and evidence, particularly when driving better peformance has never been harder.