Comments on: A board without women is …. Fairfaxed! http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/02/a-board-without-women-is-fairfaxed/ now with extra source Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:13:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Gavin Moodie http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/02/a-board-without-women-is-fairfaxed/#comment-39671 Gavin Moodie Fri, 02 Oct 2009 07:04:56 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/02/a-board-without-women-is-fairfaxed/#comment-39671 If board members were selected by ability women would be half the members, unless of course one believes that ability comes with a penis. If members were selected by ability and expertise then probably a lower proportion of women would be board members because there are prolly a lower proportion of women with media business expertise (for reasons not related to ability, but that's another issue). If board members were selected by ability, expertise and experience then even fewer would be appointed cos so few women have had senior media business experience. If board members were selected by ability, expertise, experience and reputation . . . . Women were 44% of superanuation fund members in October 2005 according to the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia. That seems intuitively right cos women have a lower participation in the paid workforce than men. If board members were selected by ability women would be half the members, unless of course one believes that ability comes with a penis. If members were selected by ability and expertise then probably a lower proportion of women would be board members because there are prolly a lower proportion of women with media business expertise (for reasons not related to ability, but that’s another issue). If board members were selected by ability, expertise and experience then even fewer would be appointed cos so few women have had senior media business experience. If board members were selected by ability, expertise, experience and reputation … .

Women were 44% of superanuation fund members in October 2005 according to the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia. That seems intuitively right cos women have a lower participation in the paid workforce than men.

]]> By: David Roberts http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/02/a-board-without-women-is-fairfaxed/#comment-39668 David Roberts Fri, 02 Oct 2009 06:59:58 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/02/a-board-without-women-is-fairfaxed/#comment-39668 Wholeheartedly agree. Regarding the age of board members: http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/board.asp?ric=FXJ.AX Wholeheartedly agree. Regarding the age of board members:
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/board.asp?ric=FXJ.AX

]]> By: Angus Sharpe http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/02/a-board-without-women-is-fairfaxed/#comment-39616 Angus Sharpe Fri, 02 Oct 2009 04:04:26 +0000 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/10/02/a-board-without-women-is-fairfaxed/#comment-39616 If we are going to ignore what shareholders think (i.e. impose quotas), and ignore the actual ability of the board members, why stop at women? The makeup of the board should be directly related to the gender and ethnicity of readers. For example, at least 1/2 the board should be women, and there should be a compulsory ethnic breakdown of the board linked to the latest ABS figures / and current Fairfax subscriptions. And this should apply to everything! In politics, for example, we should ignore what voters want, and instead always have co-prime ministers (male and female). One could be voted in, and First Dog could pick the other! Or even better, we could require a specific gender and ethnic split for government ministers. Forget about voting (for goodness sake, sometimes people elect Liberal governments!). Or. And call me crazy. We could select boards based on ability rather than colour or creed. If we are going to ignore what shareholders think (i.e. impose quotas), and ignore the actual ability of the board members, why stop at women?

The makeup of the board should be directly related to the gender and ethnicity of readers. For example, at least 1/2 the board should be women, and there should be a compulsory ethnic breakdown of the board linked to the latest ABS figures / and current Fairfax subscriptions.

And this should apply to everything! In politics, for example, we should ignore what voters want, and instead always have co-prime ministers (male and female). One could be voted in, and First Dog could pick the other! Or even better, we could require a specific gender and ethnic split for government ministers. Forget about voting (for goodness sake, sometimes people elect Liberal governments!).

Or. And call me crazy. We could select boards based on ability rather than colour or creed.

]]>