Room at the Top For Women

SUMMARY
Women are becoming visible at the top of corporate ladders, but remain few and far between. Female executives and male CEOs often agree about what helps women get ahead, but not about what holds them back. Senior-level women set priortues to achieve balance in their lives. Companies seeking to make the most of women's talents should do the same.

Bickley Townsend is senior vice president of Catalyst in New York City.

Conditions have never been more favorable for women to ascend to leadership in all sectors of the U.S. economy.
Women aged 45 to 54, of prime age to attain senior management positions, will account for more than one third of all net additions to the nation's work force between 1994 and 2005, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics projections.
Three factors drive this inexorable trend. First, the massive baby-boom generation will swell this age group during the next decade. Second, labor force participation rates among women aged 45 and older will rise as boomers replace a less well-educated, less career-oriented cohort of women. And third, men's labor force participation at older ages will continue its long-term gradual decline. These demographic developments virtually ensure that utilizing female talent will continue to gain prominence as an issue for U.S. employers in the years ahead.
A pioneering generation of American women has already begun to attain top positions in the nation's largest corporations. Although no Fortune 500 company boasts a female CEO today, Catalyst has documented substantial progress of women in big business in recent years. At the apex of corporate decision-making, women now hold about 10 percent of seats on boards of directors of Fortune 500 corporations, according to the 1995 Catalyst Census of Female Directors. Eighty-one percent of these companies had at least one woman on their boards last year, up from 69 percent just two years earlier. What's more, companies are moving beyond the tokenism of a single female director; 165 of the Fortune 500 now have two or more women on their boards. Most estimates put women's representation in senior management in corporate America at 5 percent or less. Moreover, whether by self-selection, company 'steering," or tradition, female executives tend to cluster in jobs outside the typical career paths to senior leadership. Women in the executive ranks are over represented in staff support functions such as communications, human resources, and legal affairs. Few female executives head core business areas such as sales and marketing functions, manufacturing plants, and major operating divisions. Women with top operating experience such as Ann Fudge, president of Maxwell House Coffee, a division of Kraft Foods, and Ellen Hancock, executive vice president, chief operating officer of National Semiconductor, remain rarities in corporate America.
Women's concentration in staff fimctions-and companies' reluctant to allow women to move laterally into line management positions-has led Catalyst to identify "glass walls" as an obstacle many corporate women encounter long before a "glass ceiling' impedes their upward mobihty. 'Avoid the 'female jobs," advises Ellen Hancock. In the search preceding her move from IBM to Semiconductor, she resisted opportunities that came with the staff title of chief information officer because she had "seen what happened to women who stayed in the "staff ghetto." That's not to say that directing staff functions is not valuable work, but women who aspire to the pinnacles of the business world might be better off taking a different route.
In October 1995, Catalyst surveyed 325 CEOS and 461 women at the vice presidential level and above in Fortune 1000 companies, to assess their perceptions of progress and prospects for women in corporate leadership. Twenty female executives and 20 male CEOs were also interviewed in greater depth to explore "glass ceiling" issues. The results reveal how today's successful corporate women have gotten where they are, what's holding them back from getting further, and what needs to change to build gender diversity into corporate leadership.

HOW TO GET AHEAD: THE PIE FACTOR
While not yet a critical mass in executive management, women are for the first time attaining the most senior levels in corporate America. Forty-four percent of the women Catalyst surveyed either report directly to the CEO or are one reporting level away; 81 percent are within two levels of the CEO. The largest number hold the title of vice president (54 percent) or senior vice president (19 percent). One-fifth occupy a variety of even more senior positions, including president, executive vice president, chief financial officer, and general counsel.
These female executives command high compensation. Catalyst's survey confims that they are some of the most highly paid women in America. Nine in ten earn more than $100,000 in salary and annual bonus, and average financial compensation is $248,000. Furthermore, they are the primary breadwinners in their households. Although most are married to men who are also career-oriented, these women contribute an average of 68 percent of household income.
Today's senior women executives were pioneers, often the first and only women at their levels and in their functions. What worked for them? What combination of abilities, experiences, personal qualities, and support from bosses and organizations resulted in their career success?
An old adage holds that the ingredients of career success can be summed up in the acronym "PIE"-performance, image, and exposure. Female executives seem to concur with this shorthand advice. They identify the three factors most critical to their advancement as: consistently exceeding performance expectations, considered critical by 77 percent; developing a style with which male managers are comfortable (61 percent); and seeking out difficult or high-visibility assignments (50 percent).
Corporate America expects superior business results from its executives, and successful women recognize the need to deliver on those expectations. Many female managers believe that superior performance is particularly essential for women, who may need to overperform to prove their ability in a predominantly male business environment. On the other hand, some women say that gender bias has worked to their advantage. When colleagues have low expectations of a women’s ability to perform, they are easy to exceed. "There have been more than a few times that expectations of me have been extremely low," says a female vice president of a chemical company. "Knowing that I can do this with one hand tied behind my back, and then having people overly dazzled at the achievement, makes me kind of chuckle to myself."
Besides excellent job performance, it is noteworthy that the only career strategy considered critical to advancement by a majority of women executives is developing a style with which male managers are comfortable. Clearly, delivering superior business results, while necessary for executive success, is not sufficient-at least for women. And women often expect to bend further to reach the middle ground. "Women have to go 80 percent of the way we to make men comfortable with them," says a female corporate vice president of a consumer products company.
Women in corporate management often struggle with fitting into the organizational culture without losing a sense of their own identity. Some counsel "learning to play the game as men play it," including keeping one's personal life out of the office and talking up sports. Terry Savage, a Chicago-based financial authority and director of the McDonald's Corporation, advises: "Learn to play golf. I took it up two years ago, and now I know what they do. It's not about golf. It's about riding around in the cart and sitting around afterward and talking. I was always holding out, thinking, 'I'm different. I'm a woman, and I don't have to play the games. Now I think that you can't set yourself aside and not socialize. It doesn't mean you have to be one of the guys. You can still be yourself. But it's nice to be able to be around them."
Other executive women emphasize that they have succeeded without compromising their personal style or identity. "In 1977, when I finished business school, women were coming in trying to be something that they weren't. They felt that they had to behave in a more masculine manner," says Fudge of Maxwell House. "One of the things I decided in my somewhat rebellious state was that if I felt like wearing a dress instead of a suit, that's what I was going to do. I decided I would be judged not by style, but by what I did in managing the business. That's the bottom line. Honestly, I think too many times we try to adapt, and we overadapt."

WHAT’S HOLDING WOMEN BACK
Fortune 1000 CEOs exhibit a striking degree of consensus as to the key factors preventing women from advancing to corporate leadership. A decisive 82 percent point to lack of significant general management or line experience as the most crucial barrier. A second critical obstacle, according to two-thirds of CEOs, is that women have not been "in the pipeline" long enough; that is, until recently, the executive talent pool has included few women. No more than one-third of chief executives single out any other factor that might account for women's lack of advancement.
Senior women concur with male CEOs that women's lack of significant general management or line experience is a barrier to their ascendance on the corporate ladder, although they rank it third after gender stereotyping and exclusion from informal networks. The female executives in Catalyst's sample attest to the scarcity of senior women in line management: just 15 percent are in general management or sales and marketing jobs, and more than 60 percent hold staff positions. The implication is clear. For the pipeline to contain a critical mass of women requires that significantly more women become plant managers, presidents of operating divisions, and other senior line managers with profit and loss responsibility. Yet, because these are nontraditional roles for women and because few female role models exist, some women may be reluctant to put themselves forward for line management jobs. Companies also typically regard it as riskier to assign women to these positions. "There's a certain amount of reluctance on the part of any manufacturing company to ask some young woman to move to a remote location to work as a foreman," admits one Fortune 500 CEO. "And I think there's reluctance on the part of women to want to do that."
Executive women are far less likely than CEOs to agree that women have not been in the pipeline long enough for advancement, 29 percent versus 64 percent. This may in part reflect a difference in the way the two groups define "pipeline." Female executives may be thinking in terms of women's steadily growing share of corporate management positions generally, while CEOs may focus more heavily on women's lack of experience in core functions. As one Fortune 500 CEO puts it: "It's not that women haven't been in the pipeline long enough; it's what they have done while they are in the pipeline."
Although women executives and male CEOs may agree that women haven't been steering in the right direction to advance to senior positions, they beg to differ when it comes to the issue of gender itself. In any discussion of the "glass ceiling," it's impossible to avoid the issue of discrimination. Successful female executives in Catalyst's study identify male stereotyping and preconceptions of women as the number-one major obstacle, to women's advancement to corporate leadership. They view exclusion from informal (read "old boy") networks as the next most serious deterrent. An inhospitable corporate culture also holds women back, say one-third of senior women. Male CEOs are far less likely to attribute women's scarcity in upper management to such cultural or attitudinal factors.
Despite the steady increase of women in corporate management in the past 25 years, six in ten American women still believe that women suffer discrimination in obtaining executive positions in business, according to the 1995 Virginia Slims Opinion Poll. In fact, more women hold this view than in 1970, when just half of women concurred. This increased perception of discrimination may reflect society's growing sensitivity to subtle forms of bias toward diverse groups of all kinds.
Some CEOs acknowledge that women face a challenge fitting into a traditional corporate culture and creating a comfort level with male managers. "I don't think it has anything to do with competency," says one chief executive. "I think it's just that our society has certain norms that have been built in-wives being uncomfortable with women working in the same office as their husbands, things of that nature."
Many female executives would agree that social norms have created a corporate environment that is not conducive to their presence. But most would disagree that it is simply a matter of time until the climate changes. They believe that companies committed to diversifying their leadership must take deliberate steps to change assumptions and behavior. Company leaders must ensure that women have access to informal developmental opportunities and communication channels, as well as equal shots at "stretch" assignments such as serving on corporate-wide task forces, being part of startup or turnaround operations, and gaining international experience.

SETTING PRIORTIES TO ACHIEVE BALANCE
It's unfortunate but true that employers sometimes still hesitate to hire, assign, or promote young women for fear they will marry or have babies and quit their jobs. Fortunately, this practice does not appear to have hampered women who have attained seniority in their companies. Relatively few female executives or CEOs surveyed by Catalyst identify "commitment to family responsibilities" as among the top obstacles to women's advancement. This may be because many high-level female executives are older and no longer in active child-raising years. But it may also be that these women have refused to let their personal lives affect their careers.
In some cases, executive women have deliberately chosen job above family. Although 72 percent of those surveyed are currently married, and another 17 percent have been married, a not insignificant 10 percent say they chose not to marry in order to balance career and personal life. Likewise, 64 percent are mothers, but 20 percent say they decided not to have children as a means to manage their career and personal lives. Twenty-six percent postponed childbearing as part of their career-life balancing strategy. Younger women are almost twice as likely as those aged 45 and older to have delayed motherhood as part of a career strategy, 34 percent versus 19 percent, yet they Are no more likely to want t forego childbearing altogether.
The strategies used by women executives to manage work and personal life suggest that lifestyle balance means setting clear priorities, rather than having it all. "Balance? There is no balance," say the general counsel of a top media company. " My life consists of my kids, my husband, and my work. My other interests have been absolutely subordinated those particular sets of obligations." She goes on to acknowledge that the obligations are ones she's chosen to take on "The only thing that sustains me is the knowledge that life is chapters. My children are not going to be young forever. If you can accept the choices you've made and see them as a succession over time, you're going to be fine."
Fifty-five percent of senior management women surveyed by Catalyst say they have pursued personal interests such as fitness, a hobby, or community involvement as a way to balance their lives. Virtually the same share, 54 percent, say they have curtailed such interests toward the same end. This means that some small share of women have done both, presumably by making strategic choices about their commitments and the activities they pursue. Setting priorities and rigorously managing their time is a practical necessity for these women, as it is for many busy women in nonexecutive jobs. Employed mothers at all levels have to wrestle with the work-family dilemma, but women executives have a big advantage in at least one area. They can afford to pay people to do things for them. Eighty-five percent have employed household help, and nearly all mothers (93 percent) have used child-care services. One executive buys "top of the line" goods and services specifically to reduce the time required to repair or replace inferior products.
A supportive husband and exceptional physical stamina are also cited by some women as crucial to their ability to balance work and family responsibilities. Giving up sleep is a common theme. "I sleep very little and have a huge capacity for work, says one executive. "I married, had a child, got a Ph.D., and worked full-time the entire time." Another woman gives her husband some of the credit, too: "You can't do it without a spouse who's willing to work with you. The first thing he did was to believe it was right, and enter into the marriage under the assumption that I was going to work. The second thing is that he has always done his share of the tasks."
They may rely on their husbands, but few female executives report having used company-sponsored programs for work/ life balance, such as maternity leaves, working at home, or working flexible hours. Part of the explanation is generational. Flexible work options were less likely to have been available to senior women when they were younger and working their way up. Nor, as pioneering women in management, would it have been acceptable for many to have availed themselves of such alternatives. Indeed, older women speak of having gone to great lengths to avert any perceptions that family responsibilities might affect their career commitment, from hiding their pregnancies to calling in sick when in fact they had a sick child to care for.

MAKING CHANGE HAPPEN
Both the top women and top men in major corporations believe that companies, as well as women, have a responsibility to address women's needs in an evolving managerial work force. Corporate America has begun to undertake effective initiatives to foster gender diversity in leadership. The three strategies listed below are key to successfully developing and retaining talented women:
Groom High-Potential Women for Advancement. In theory, this is simple. Employers need only examine how high-potential men are typically groomed whether through formal mechanisms like executive education stints at top business schools, or informal means such as key assignments or mentors-and ensure similar opportunities for talented women. In practice, of course, this approach often involves profound cultural change within organizations. Providing a female manager with a "stretch" assignment essential for her development may mean putting her in charge of a function or a factory or an international operation that has never before reported to a woman.
To address this challenge, some companies have launched formal programs to identify and develop high-potential managerial talent-usually not exclusively for women, but with women well represented among program participants. In 1990, Continental Insurance began its Advanced Development Program (ADP), which identifies each year, through an elaborate nomination and screening process, ten high-potential managers for participation. The program may last from three to seven years and involves a series of rotational assignments, the opportunity for exposure to senior management through presentations and attendance at key company events, and coaching by a senior executive who serves as a mentor. Typically, at least half of ADP participants are women.
BUILD Diversity Objectives into Succession Planning.
Many large companies have developed well-structured succession planning processes to ensure development and continuity of leadership. One effective way to foster diversity in senior management is to incorporate diversity into the succession planning process, by ensuring that the executive feeder pool includes women and people of color. This may require linking succession planning to career development practices (such as the grooming of high-potential talent) at lower levels in the organization than are customarily considered.
Motorola built diversity into a well-established succession planning process known as Organizational Management and Development Review. In considering potential successors for top jobs, the company's leadership now reviews a list of three possible candidates for each position, at least one of whom is a woman or minority manager. Executive advisors coach the candidates on managing their careers and gaining critical experience. As a result of this disciplined focus, the number of female vice presidents at Motorola has risen from 2 to 32 since 1989.
Plug Leaks In the Pipeline.
Many companies are losing female talent at a disproportionate rate, often after investing
significant resources in women's training and development. Prudent financial management alone calls for addressing the attrition of high-potential women. One strategy for reducing turnover is to improve the performance and management review process so it provides employees with more feedback and managers with periodic pulse-checks to identify early-warning signs of disaffection. It also helps simply to let high-performing women know they are valued. Catalyst studies find that feeling underappreciated is a major cause of voluntary resignations. It's important to know why valuable employees leave. Because workers are often less than candid about their true reasons for quitting before they're gone, some companies conduct post-exit interviews that yield forthright information about why employees leave, which in turn suggests ways to reduce turnover. This information can be particularly useful for retaining women, who are often assumed to quit for personal reasons such as staying home with children. Women themselves may foster this largely incorrect assumption by citing such "acceptable" reasons rather than facing the unpleasantness of explaining work-related reasons for quitting. When Catalyst conducted a study for the Big Six accounting firm Deloitte & Touche in 1992, it revealed that 90 percent of former female professionals, even those with young children, had continued their careers elsewhere. More than 70 percent were working full-time; 20 percent had part-time arrangements. This information surprised firm leaders, who had assumed most were at home caring for their children, and they adopted more flexible work policies.
Given people's and organizations' innate resistance to change, corporate leaders must present a persuasive case for meaningful change to take place. Before they do this, they must be genuinely convinced themselves that it is the right thing to do. Catalyst asked senior women about what factors should motivate companies to increase the representation of women in senior management.
The biggest reason why companies should support advancement initiatives for women in management, according to female executives, is because they're already there, in the management pool. Seven in ten executive Women strongly agree with this proposition. Another reason, strongly endorsed by 61 percent, is that women have a unique perspective to contribute to business decision-making and problem-solving.
A third reason why companies should boost the representation of women in senior management, according to female executives, is because they reflect the demographics of the consumer marketplace: that is, women represent more than half of the adult population and an increasing share of buying power. However, fewer than half of women in senior management think that bowing to pressure from customers, or from shareholders or the law, for that matter, should be a driving force behind women's initiatives. And they are split down the middle on the issue of whether companies should support the advancement of women out of a corporate sense of social responsibility. Half say yes; half say no.
Ultimately, the single best reason to have women running companies is because they can do it. "The winners are going to be the organizations that view diversity as truly a mechanism to gain competitive advantage," says a Fortune 500 CEO. "If you have a richer senior management decision-making process, where more views are easily expressed and incorporated, you're going to wind up with better decisions."

DEMOGRAM
Irene M. Stillings

Title: vice president, electric marketing and sales, New York State Electric & Gas

Her first three careers: After graduating with an honors degree in liberal arts from the University of Rochester, Irene did a stint as a high school social studies teacher. She then spent time as a full-time mother and homemaker raising three children. During that period, she earned a Master's degree. She then put her business skills to use by opening a scuba-diving shop.

Career path at NYSEG: Irene has been at NYSEG for 20 years; she has been a vice president for 10. "I started in an entry-level marketing position. Most of the jobs were held by men and younger women, but I think my education and retail background got my foot in the door."

External factors in success: "it was being in the right place at the right time with the right skills when they recognized they needed them. They thought I had potential."

Internal traits contributing to success: "I had a vision about what I wanted to achieve, not only personally, but of how this company should treat its customers based on my years as a small-business owner. This touchstone helped me stay focused on moving forward. I'm also consistent, enthusiastic, and energetic, and willing to go the extra distance. I never say it's not my job. If something needs doing, I just do it."

On going the extra distance: For Irene, this means doing things outside her job description, putting in extra hours, and putting her soul into the job.

On maintaining a balance: "No job is perfect and there are always frustrations. Women need to maintain balance. We have to have something that gives us pleasure away from work. For me, it's scuba diving, golfing, and reading, and I make sure I have time to do those things. I don't cook or clean. And I take my vacation."

Advice for wannabe women executives: "You have to have good communications skills. You have to be able to speak well on your feet. The presentation is important, the packaging. This doesn't mean you have to spend a fortune on clothes, but you have to look professional-whatever that means in your business. You have to develop a presence so that people know you're there.
"You can't do a good job if you don't believe in what you're doing. Above all, you've got to have a sense of humor; you can't take yourself so seriously."