Kelvin Teo
A feature on executive women in Forbes magazine
As of 2011, the statistics for our female counterparts in terms of the number of women Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) leading Fortune 500 companies does indeed look depressing. Last year, there were 15 women CEOs, but this year, the number whittled down to 12. Three left their post and were succeeded by men. In terms of C-suite appointments, i.e. Chief _______ Officer, for example, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Technology Officer, Chief Financial Officer, etc, women are poorly represented in comparison with men at a ratio of one to four.
Hence, this leads to the pertinent question – what is really holding women back? It is tempting to attribute this situation to male chauvinism or sexism, but to do so is to continually flog a dead horse. It is not about sexism; women have indeed made gains at middle and senior management level positions, but they face a challenge in breaking the barrier in order to advance into the C-suite realm. This barrier has little to do with a male conspiracy against women, but has more to do with the issue of sponsorship. A study entitled “The Sponsor Effect: Breaking Through the Last Glass Ceiling” and conducted by Sylvia Ann Hewlett, an economist and Founding President of the Centre for Work-Life Policy together with colleagues explored firstly, the impact of sponsorship, and subsequently, women’s perception of sponsorship and why they failed to to make use of it. The study was published earlier this year in the January edition of Harvard Business Review.
What exactly is sponsorship? A sponsor is one who vouches on his or her protégé’s behalf and advocates the latter’s next promotion. A sponsor also fulfills at least of the following roles – expanding the perception of the protégé’s talents and abilities, connecting the protégé to senior leaders, promoting the protégé’s visibility, opening up career opportunities for the protégé, provision of advice on effective leadership, and lastly, mentoring. The difference between mentors and sponsors is that whilst the former gives friendly advice, it is the latter that is responsible for advancing the protégé’s career.
The study examined the statistical impact of sponsorship and non-sponsorship – a sponsor confers a statistical career benefit of anything which ranges from 22 – 30%, which in itself makes a huge difference to one’s career. For those who are unsponsored, majority, 67% for men and 70% for women, resist from confronting their superiors about a pay-rise. With the backing of a sponsor, nearly half of the men and 38% of women summoned the courage to negotiate for a pay-rise. What the study also found was that women who are qualified to lead simply lack the sponsorship to advance their careers within the realms of upper management.
The question is why are women missing out on sponsorship? The study revealed that women underestimated the role of sponsorship in their advancement. Those who understood its benefits failed to reap its fruits. Many had considered getting ahead based on connections a dirty tactic and held the opinion that hard work alone held the key in rising to the top. However, the issue of sponsorship is one which requires two hands to clap. Sponsorship, especially in the event of an older married and high-flying male spending time in cultivating an unmarried female protégé, may be misconstrued as sexual interest and appear like an office affair. This is especially so when the disparity between sponsor and protégé within the company’s hierarchy is huge. Thus, it does not come as a surprise that women who feedbacked that getting ahead on such connections is considered a “dirty tactic” harbored the assumption that a relationship between sponsor and protégé as one that involved sexual favours.
Hence, to prevent a potentially ‘toxic fallout’ as a result of sponsorship between a male sponsor and a female protégé, ambitious women avoid seeking sponsorship, and men in high places who want to avoid misunderstanding of sexual advancements and affairs avoid sponsoring. As such, women have limited opportunities in advancing to top leadership positions. The next question is what can be done to improve the current situation that allows talented women with leadership qualities to rise to the very top? Hewlett reported of leading companies that attempt to make relationships between sponsors and protégé safe and transparent. It is an initiative which is worth taking up by companies. With such a safe and transparent channel, women will be more open to seeking sponsorship and progress under their sponsor’s cultivation. Sponsors through participation in such channels have less worry in being misconstrued of making sexual advances and accused of being involved in an office affair.
However, as it stands, the current circumstance is that women are held back from being appointed to top leadership positions in leading firms due to the lack of sponsorship. Women abstain from seeking sponsorship especially from a male in high position due to the toxic assumption that such a cultivating relationship would inevitably involve sexual favours. The male sponsor likewise would want to avoid being misconstrued as making sexual advances and being involved in an office affair. It appears that channels which promote safe and transparent relationships between sponsors and their protégé might alleviate the situation and help qualified women rise to top leadership positions. Companies may consider implementing such channels. However, according to Hewlett, such an initiative although implemented by leading companies is still work in progress where further improvements can be made.
—
Photo courtesy one OneEye, Flickr Commons
