EOWA's reform change includes being renamed the Gender Equity Unit. Making the cultural changes described in this article can be supported by workplaces where accepting family friendly benefits is accepted and used by men, such as accessing carer's leave to look after their children.
Secret to breaking glass ceiling? Go home for dinner
Lisa Martin
May 26, 2011 - 3:29PM
Women will break the glass ceiling when Australian corporate culture dictates that everyone goes home for dinner, Sue Morphet says.
The Pacific Brands chief executive says long, family-unfriendly hours are killing off women's chances of progressing into senior management positions.
"The most important thing we have to do is look after women through their 30s," she said.
Advertisement: Story continues below
"I've got daughters that age myself, and I'm watching them come in and out of their careers with babies.
"The most important thing to keep women on their way to senior executive roles ... is to ensure that men and women take accountability for the domestic environment."
Ms Morphet said simple cultural changes, such as making sure people go home for dinner, could make a difference.
"If we can encourage a go-home-for-dinner culture, so that everyone has a chance to do what they have to do with their day, then we are more likely to get women working in corporate roles," she said.
"Many companies expect management to be there for such late hours.
"With all the technology we've got, they should go home for dinner and work on the dining room table afterwards instead of making corridor decisions late at night.
"Women who have got young children can't do that unless they've got a partner who can go home."
Ms Morphet said she leads by example.
"The upside of being a working mother is that it forces you to go home for dinner," she says.
"You do literally pack up, put stuff in your bag, go home and have dinner and then when the kids are doing their homework, you do yours, too."
Penny Bingham-Hall is among a rising number of women executives on the boards of our top 200 companies, writes Adele Ferguson.
SHE mightn't be a household name - yet - but in the rough and tumble of the male-dominated construction world, Penny Bingham-Hall became legendary as the only woman to rise through the ranks at Leighton Holdings and become a direct report to then chief executive, the no-nonsense high-profile Wal King.
Bingham-Hall symbolises the new breed of women cashing in their senior executive positions for seats on the boards of Australia's biggest companies.
Names including Emma Stein, Judith Swales and Diane Smith-Gander are just a few of the new style of women directors, who are coming from operational roles rather than the more well-worn professional services path of their predecessors.
Advertisement: Story continues below
It has been a long time coming. For most companies, a decision by the ASX last year to name and shame companies that do not have women on boards or in senior management ranks, coupled with the threat of introducing quotas if things don't improve, has put a rocket under corporate Australia.
They will do well to take it seriously. In Britain, a government inquiry on the issue of women in the boardroom recommended on Thursday that FTSE 100 companies aim for at least 25 per cent of their boards be made up of women by 2015 or face forced changes through statutory quotas.
The quota debate has split Australia. At a lunch in Sydney this month hosted by the Committee for Economic Development of Australia, highly regarded director Elizabeth Proust said 10 years ago she was opposed to quotas. But without them, she says, it is hard to know how to get there. "Just the threat of them means change. ''
In just 12 months, the number of women on the top 200 boards has risen from 8 per cent to 11 per cent - and is expected to keep rising. It is a move in the right direction but embarrassingly low compared to most Western countries, in particular Norway's 40 per cent representation. At the last count, 84 boards in the ASX 200 do not have women on them.
For Charles Carnegie, a partner at risk leadership consultants The Waypoint Group, the current systems and processes embedded in a firm subconsciously discourage women. "There are millions of women and men in Australia relying on the judgment of about 5000 board directors for their financial security in retirement. Excluding great female executives because of bias and outdated process issues is just plain dumb.''
Responses to advertised board positions by the Australian Institute of Company Directors indicate ''board ready'' women are in good supply. "Females account for over half the population,'' said Prue Gilbert, principal of Melbourne's Prue Gilbert Consulting.
''They are leaders in politics, public service, family, community and education, and what's more they make some 70 per cent of consumer purchasing decisions. Organisations that fail to have female representation across all levels of their business might be missing out on the female perspective, a perspective which could have far-reaching benefits for its business."
For women like Bingham-Hall, who came from the country's biggest construction group Leighton, it is perfect timing.
At 50, Bingham-Hall tossed in a highly successful career at Leighton to consider her next career move. "I was about to turn 50 and I said to myself after 23 years at Leighton and five years as head of strategy, what can I do next? I didn't want to go to another company so I decided to take a break, keep a couple of directorships on [non-profit] boards and do some pro bono work assisting Aboriginal businesses in Redfern and Gove in the Northern Territory," she said.
It gave her a chance to spend time with her two daughters and husband Rob Aldis, who is managing director of Evans & Peck, an advisory firm in the engineering and infrastructure sector. "It's been fantastic to have the time to get involved in areas that interest me.''
Those interests include being the chairwoman of Advocacy Services Australia, the fiduciary company that runs two of the country's most powerful infrastructure and property lobby groups, Infrastructure Partnerships Australia and the Tourism and Transport Forum.
She is also on the board of citizens' organisation The Global Foundation, which includes an advisory council with names such as the Future Fund chairman, David Murray, Transfield's Tony Shepherd, David Gonski and Woolworths' James Strong, and she sits on a panel to provide advice on a new Sydney Convention Centre.
For most people, this would be a full-time job. But Bingham-Hall saw it as time out before getting serious about board positions on big listed companies and continuing her pro bono work with Aboriginal organisations. "As someone who comes from the corporate world but understands Aboriginal perspectives, I can advocate to help them find business partners and opportunities,'' she said. ''Engaging with their communities is fundamental to improving opportunities.''
When Bingham-Hall started at Leighton in 1986 it was a shadow of what it is today. The company's share price was about $1, revenue was $1 billion and profit was below $20 million - in a good year. Today it is the biggest mining contractor in the world and generates hundreds of millions of dollars in profit a year.
Bingham-Hall grew with it, moving from investor relations to government relations, crisis management to talent management to business strategy and planning.
"I was given opportunities, and had a great mentor in Dieter Adamsas, who taught me about how the business operated and how the numbers came together," she said.
Described by associates as analytical, strongly logical, tenacious and highly personable, Bingham-Hall is receiving many calls from headhunters about board positions. "It's an exciting time," she says.
"There is no doubt that Australian public companies would be better governed if they had more diverse views around the board table.
''There has been a club and it has been predominantly white, Anglo-Saxon and male. Leighton has given me plenty of experience in a tough, male-dominated company. I want to take that experience and apply it in other Australian companies - particularly ones that are expanding into Asia.''
But it was her role in strategy at Leighton that gave her a real taste for the power and influence of boards and what works with boards and what does not. "I enjoy the 'helicopter view' at board level and feel comfortable looking across both the financial performance of a company and its strategic direction. I think I also have a pretty good handle on governance issues. And, of course, it's important not to be afraid to ask 'the dumb questions'.''
Bingham-Hall introduced some discipline and process around the group's strategic thinking, according to David Mortimer, chairman of Leighton Holdings. "Leighton is a rough and tumble environment and Penny rolled with the punches. In this industry you can't kowtow to people, and Penny used commonsense and logic to come back at them.''
At her first strategy presentation to the board in May 2006, the board erupted into applause. Back then Leighton's profit was $200 million with budgets that looked out 12 to 18 months. She presented an eight-point strategic road map with a financial overlay and options for getting the company to $500 million in five years. They included looking at geographical diversification such as India, Mongolia and the Middle East, and market diversification in Australia such as defence, residential property and services.
In her roles on industry associations, she has had a big influence on infrastructure policy, says Mark Birrell, the chairman of Infrastructure Partnerships Australia. "Penny is great person. She worked on some key projects when she was at Leighton, including the early proposals for high-speed rail in Australia.''
Bingham-Hall spent two years lobbying the federal and NSW governments to support a high-speed railway. Earlier this year the federal government said it would spend $20 million on a detailed study into high-speed rail on Australia's east coast. It has commissioned a consultant that has indicated a fast train should be possible.
It is her passion to get good infrastructure policy in Australia that most impresses Tony Shepherd, the chairman of Transfield Services. "Penny has been very active in the industry, sitting on the boards of key associations and has made a great contribution to lifting the profile of the industry and its needs," he said.
"We have just appointed Diane Smith-Gander to the board of Transfield and the thing with women like Diane and Penny is they speak their piece, they thump the drum but there is no ego in it.''
But being a woman and climbing the ranks is irrelevant for Wal King, Bingham-Hall's former boss.
To him, success in the male-dominated industry is all about being adaptive, consultative and determined. "Penny is a person that has been able to adapt and be relevant in a way that is appropriate to change. She is focused, she isn't a radical, she has a great ability to understand the important issues and she follows through on what she says she will do.''
For men in politics, power is the ultimate aphrodisiac. At least, it was for Henry Kissinger in 1973 when he was secretary of state in the Nixon administration and was rarely photographed on social occasions without a gorgeous woman on his arm. Even then, Kissinger was no oil painting so the question was: how did he do it? He was disarmingly frank in his explanation. It was the allure of his power.
The same is not true for women.
As newly-installed Premier of Tasmania, Lara Giddings, noted this week: "At times I wonder whether or not your role as a member of Parliament ... may in fact inhibit a relationship developing.
Advertisement: Story continues below
''I don't have a steady relationship. That's something that women in politics deal with. For some reason, men in politics seem to have a larger charisma and women drop around their feet. I haven't noticed that so much for me.''
Giddings's frank and perhaps rueful ruminations on a rather important topic for aspiring women politicians were prompted by a question at her first press conference as Premier. She was asked: "As a single woman taking on the role, do you, are you concerned perhaps you're giving up the potential to have a family? Is it compatible?"
The questioner was a female journalist. I like to think her name was Bridget Jones.
The new Premier had just told the press conference of her biggest task: "We face a particularly challenging time with the state budget as a result of the continuing impact of the global financial crisis and the loss of GST revenue from the Commonwealth."
She did not mention finding a partner as among her challenges, yet the following day, The Australian carried a front-page story headed, "Leftist Lara Giddings still looking for Mr Right".
Why on Earth was this suddenly relevant the day Giddings became Tasmania's first female premier? It was not as if she had landed from Mars. She was, until the day before, Treasurer and Attorney-General. She'd been single then. Now she was Premier, Treasurer and Minister for the Arts and suddenly her marital status was an issue. Why?
The answer, of course, is that even as the numbers of women assuming positions of political leadership grow, so does the trivialisation and the double standard. You might have thought that with a female Governor-General and Governor in NSW, a female prime minister, three female High Court judges, a female Deputy Opposition Leader and, now, three female premiers that we might have reached sufficient critical mass for clothes and marital status not to matter. Apparently not.
During the week of the crisis of the Queensland floods when Premier Anna Bligh and Prime Minister Julia Gillard were fronting the cameras daily to explain, announce and reassure, both women were subjected to an astonishing ongoing assessment about their clothes, their hairstyles, make-up, and even about the ways in which they laid hands on evacuees.
The comments were mostly along the lines of good Anna/bad Julia. It was quite extraordinary when you think about it. Can you imagine similar comments being made about John Brumby and Kevin Rudd during the Victorian bushfires? None of us gave a toss what the premier and prime minister were wearing or how they had styled their hair. It only ever happens with the women. It's the same with marital - and maternal - status.
Would a childless male politician be denounced as "deliberately" unfertile? Are any male MPs asked about their childcare arrangements? Was Wyatt Roy, the young (and single) National Party federal member for the Queensland seat of Longman asked whether he was concerned that he was giving up the potential to have a family, given the long stints he'd need to spend in Canberra? Of course he wasn't.
It is one of the great paradoxes of current Australian society that as the numbers of women in public life grow, we seem to become more anxious about whether they are "real" women; whether they are married and have children.
We seem to fear that power erodes femininity, which just goes to show that we still retain unexamined, and perhaps unconscious, assumptions about political power being masculine.
It's been interesting to note that in Australia, whilst this story was widely aired there has been minimal public commentary on the issue here. Some news stories made comment that such remarks might be "appropriate at a barbeque but not in an official capacity". So it's ok to believe this in secret as long as you don't tell anyone?The SMH article reported: The pair caused controversy after agreeing female officials "don't know the offside rule". Then it added: She ended up calling a crucial borderline decision correctly. As if the issue of her being there on merit was the issue to prove or disprove the validity of the sexist remarks.
We have a long way to go girls. And I'm surprised at how often I hear watered down versions of these kinds of views. It's important not to get upset over it, but I do try and challenge stereotypical views when I see and hear them.
Gray and his colleague Richard Keys were reprimanded over the weekend after they were recorded making derogatory comments about lineswoman Sian Massey before the Barclays Premier League match between Liverpool and Wolverhampton Wanderers.
But Gray, who has been the face of Sky Sports' football coverage for 20 years, has been stood down permanently after the broadcaster uncovered "new evidence of unacceptable and offensive behaviour".
The new footage shows Gray making a suggestive comment and gesture toward Sky Sports colleague Charlotte Jackson in the studio.
"Andy Gray's contract has been terminated for unacceptable behaviour," said Sky Sports managing director Barney Francis.
"After issuing a warning, we have no hesitation in taking this action after becoming aware of new information today."
''ARE you looking at me?'' she asked, with the start of a frown.
I had noted she had recently streaked her hair, spent quite some time on make-up, complete with enhanced eyelashes and lipstick of an intriguing hue, was adorned with attractive earrings and necklace, was wearing a lift-and-separate bra that was certainly doing its job, had undone the perfect number of buttons to display a sweeping decolletage, and her skirt was designed to emphasise a pair of silkily stockinged legs terminating in an elegant pair of quite substantial heels.
''Well … yes,'' I confirmed.
''Do you think that's appropriate behaviour in a boardroom?'' she asked.
Now I wasn't staring, gawking or goggling, just noting the package in a vaguely appreciative manner.
Appropriate behaviour? The clear implication was that my behaviour may have been somehow inappropriate. And here is where the gender problem begins. I am a male … a bloke … even, perhaps, a chap. Whichever, I almost certainly march to the beat of a different drum.
If I had gone to a similar degree of trouble to make myself stand out from the crowd, I would have been severely disconcerted had I not been noticed. Or, conversely, would have been delighted if someone had taken the trouble to observe, appreciate and nod tacit approval.
''I was just noticing the benefits of ladies' apparel in our climate,'' I intoned. As we were, in fact, sitting in a boardroom, my expected attire included a tie and jacket.
''There's no need to be condescending,'' she snorted. Of course! She was no lady! She was a ''woman''. Again, if someone were to refer to me as a ''gentleman'', I would feel quite chuffed.
''It's no wonder they're talking of bringing in quotas to ensure women get the opportunity to bring a female point of view to boards.'' I didn't like to mention the fact that she was the member of a board here. I was just a consultant presenting a paper.
''The sooner they bring in quotas to get more women into parliament, the better things will be as well,'' she muttered.
Now, Australia has had equal franchise since Federation and the country has almost always contained more women than men, so surely more women have voted for men than for their own brand. (Let's not even start on the Premier, Prime Minister, Governor-General thing).
Sometimes I ponder the value of passing a law that women must be obnoxious to men, if only to watch them beating blokes about with umbrellas demanding the right to be nice. Ian Freeman Posted in the SMH 27 January 2011 http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/boardroom-diversion-and-division-20110123-1a16x.html
