Showing posts with label Business. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Business. Show all posts

Wednesday, 4 September 2013

Do sporty women make better entrepreneurs? - By Jane O'Brien

Accessed 4th September 2013
22 August 2013 Last updated at 01:17

Do sporty women make better entrepreneurs?

Whoops and cheers greet Shavannia Williams, who steps onto the conference floor with an agility unfettered by her 6in (15cm) stilettos.
This is Heels and Helmets, a training camp for women in Washington DC that uses sport to help them elevate their business game.
"Sport teaches us that you cannot allow your accomplishments to make you complacent, and you can't allow your fears to stop you from soaring," says Ms Williams, president of Heels and Helmets, and editor of an online magazine of the same name.
"It's about understanding the culture behind sports as well as the vernacular. I relate it to working and studying in another country."
With a background in sports marketing, Ms Williams is well placed to help other women understand the lingo.
Prof Sheila WellingtonStern School of Business
But while using sporting analogies in business isn't new, an increasing number of organisations are now looking at whether playing sport can make women better entrepreneurs.
Consulting company Ernst and Young surveyed 821 senior managersand found the vast majority of top women executives had played sport at school or university.
The company says its research validates and underscores the fundamental role that participation in sport plays in developing women leaders. As a result, it has launched its own Women Athletes Global Leadership Network.
Ms Williams also highlights the networking benefit that businesswomen can gain from playing sport - access to the locker room, that exclusive male space, real or metaphorical, where men are said to seal deals, and make the business decisions that matter most.
Research, by Catalyst, a non-profit organisation aiming to advance women in business also stresses the networking boost that sport can offer females, both playing and watching it.
'Stronger resilience'
Ernst and Young's findings do not surprise Karlyn Lothery, a Washington-based communications consultant who works extensively with athletes, and uses the psychological power of sport to help her less active clients too.
Women with a sports background usually show more confidence, she says. That can range from having a firm handshake to speaking authoritatively without a rising inflection at the end of a sentence which some women adopt to avoid appearing confrontational or too assertive.
"When the athlete-turned-executive has a point, they make it," says Ms Lothery. "You can't have that softer, questionable, doubtful sound in your voice. [Athletes] have this confidence of, 'We are going to do this, we will do this, we can do this, and we will win.' There's greater strength there.
"They usually have stronger resilience too, because in sport you have to learn to lose but then pick yourself up and get back in."
Ms Lothery has played a number of team sports including softball, football and basketball. She left her job in television news to work for the US Tennis Association before starting her own business in 2008 - just as the economy collapsed.
She says her sports background gave her the skills to transform her $30,000 (£19,000) a year start-up into a company with an annual turnover of about $1m.
"In sport you look at what the successful teams are doing, what training you need to do better. I'm a great communication consultant, but what I learned at that moment was I wasn't great at running my business.
"So I did the practice necessary for any team to regroup and rebuild - they've got to make time for practice and do the drills and work longer hours. Adopting that philosophy, I think, was it."
Sheila Wellington, a professor of management at the New York University Stern School of Business agrees, saying that "having athletic experience gives women a kind of experience and edge that is undoubtedly helpful in the business world".
She adds: "Women who are eager to win are sometimes characterised as being bitches. A guy who's eager to win is called a winner.
"A woman who competes is considered not to be feminine. A guy who competes is a go-getter. Sport teaches women that it's all right to want to win and it's all right to be on top, that there's nothing wrong with caring about being part of a winning team.
"These are important life lessons, and the earlier girls learn them the better off they'll be."
Negative side
But simply playing sport isn't enough, says Maureen Weiss, professor of kinesiology at the University of Minnesota.
"I strongly feel that competitive sport and other physical activity can provide the skills needed in the business world, but one key thing - this is not an automatic consequence of participation," she says.
"When individuals have a negative experience of sport, it can really have a very negative effect on self-esteem and motivation."
Ms Weiss is starting a longitudinal study in the autumn that will assess how structured physical activity can teach girls social and psychological skills.
She'll be tracking the development of girls who take part in programmes offered by Girls on the Run, a nationwide non-profit organisation that seeks to improve physical and mental health through activities culminating in a 5km (three-mile) run.
Achieving a goal that many thought was unobtainable instils confidence and teaches the value of focus, effort and determination, says Girls on the Run president, Elizabeth Kunz.
Many girls drop out of sport when they reach puberty, the same age at which they often start to lose confidence and self-esteem, she says.
"It's like a rite of passage. We're really trying to give them the tools they need so that when this time comes they can remember what they learned at Girls on the Run."
Other experts say sport in general teaches the value of teamwork, discipline and willpower - as well as creating the physical stamina necessary for long hours and a gruelling workload.
The message seems clear - business is a tough game so employ the same tactics you would in competitive sport and you stand a better chance of winning. And by the way girls, it's OK to want to win.


Viewpoints: Should equal gender pay be enforced? - BBC news

Accessed 4th September 2013

20 August 2013 Last updated at 16:39

Viewpoints: Should equal gender pay be enforced?

New salary figures released by the Chartered Management Institute (CMI) have documented that the gender gap in basic salaries has increased at senior levels.
The pay gap between men and women is exacerbated by bonus payments given to male managers which are on average double those for women, says the CMI.
Male managers' average bonus payments were £6,442 last year compared with £3,029 for women.
The gender pay gap increases with each rung of the management ladder, says the CMI, with male salaries already almost 25% higher than women's before bonuses are even taken into account.
Male managers' earnings across all levels are rising faster than women's for the first time in five years, according to the study, while male directors' earnings rose 5.3% over the last year, compared to just 1.1% for female directors.
The gender pay imbalance has remained in place despite the 1970 Equal Pay Act being in force for several decades.
Experts give differing opinions below on whether equal gender pay should be enforced and how the gap should be addressed.
Charlotte Bowyer, of the Adam Smith Institute
The gender pay gap persists for complex reasons, and legal enforcement of equal pay risks harming women.
Sexism does exist in the workplace: some employers undervalue less traditionally "masculine" attributes and skills, leading them to compare women unfavourably against conventionally "male" skills. But that isn't the only reason for the pay gap. Less women occupy senior positions, which can be reflected in terms of bonus payouts, whilst women are less likely than male counterparts to single themselves out for rises and financial rewards.
Women can also be costly to employers in terms of maternity leave, getting "back up to speed" and higher days off dealing with domestic emergencies. Lower pay can therefore compensate for the opportunity costs sometimes incurred when hiring women.
Blunt enforcement of equal pay doesn't address these problems, and can instead have the perverse effect of discouraging employers from hiring women. If taking women on simply becomes more expensive, some employers will be less inclined to do so.
Addressing the gender pay gap should be a social issue and not a legal one. The market is amoral and well-intentioned attempts to make it fairer will fail if they come from the top down.
As having women in senior corporate positions becomes less of a novelty and more of a given, workplace discrimination is likely to diminish.
Furthermore, shifts towards flexible childcare choices and increased paternity leave uptake are likely to level the playing field and reduce "maternity risk".
Enforcing equal pay does little to tackle the reason behind pay inequality and can easily be invasive, costly and distortionary. It's an easy answer, but it's the wrong one.
Geraldine Healy, professor of employment relations at Queen Mary
Although individual pay is shrouded in secrecy, it is well established that the gender pay gap has been resilient over time, despite improvements claimed in recent years.
The overall pay gap is 19%, 15% for full-time workers but 34% for part-time workers. Given we have had an Equal Pay Act in force since 1975, we have to conclude that legislation has not been sufficient.
The problems with the Equal Pay Act lie in its construction and implementation, not in its intention. The law has required greater diligence from the public sector through the Gender Equality Duty and now the Public Sector Equality Duty requirements, which should also cover the private sector.
The introduction of fees to take a case to tribunal in July 2013 has made implementation more difficult. Individual claimant costs to lodge equal pay and discrimination cases are now £250 plus an additional £950 to hear a case, prohibitive for all but the well-paid. The current legislation is loaded against the claimant who needs huge courage and tenacity to pursue an equal pay case.
There is little doubt that the law is important and needs to be strengthened and simplified for it to be effective. However, the underlying institutions of the law need to be more, not less, accessible.
It is undoubtedly the case that, unless we have greater transparency in pay and in bonuses in both the public and the private sector, the prospect of equal pay remains a laudable aim rather than a target to be achieved. Thus equal gender pay regulation, not voluntarist approaches, remain essential and should be protected and strengthened, not diluted.
I would prefer the market to decide. I do certainly agree with equal pay for equal work, and I've done that throughout my career, but I'm not too certain that I like the idea of legislation to enforce it.
Then you start getting quotas, saying you have to have "so" many women and "so" many men. I'm not sure that by forcing quotas necessarily means you get the right person.
When you give somebody an increase [in salary] you do it for performance purposes hopefully, and that is obviously very subjective - and if you start saying equal pay then you're really saying: "Forget the idea of doing performance-related pay - just scrap that and give everyone the same salary," and I don't agree with that either.
The only thing I can think of is maybe something along the lines of companies getting certain tax or capital gains advantages, according to the percentage of the women they employ - in certain bands or certain categories - and the differential in average salaries between the male and female side. [You could] give the company some sort of tax advantage or, if you like, disincentive if the gap is too wide.
I think it's better done with a carrot rather than a stick.
Sophie Goddard, of Cosmopolitan magazine
Laws on equal pay have existed for more than 40 years, but women are still paid less than men - and it's getting worse. At the current rate of change, a baby girl born this year won't achieve equal pay until she's 97 years old.
Something obviously has to be done - no woman should be paid less than a man doing the same job simply because she's a woman.
But I don't think enforcing equal pay is the answer - comparing jobs and salaries across the board is mind-bogglingly complex and it's never going to be as simple as giving both sexes who share a job title the same salary.
Last year, Cosmo ran a campaign calling on the government to make equal pay auditing compulsory. If companies employing 250 people or more had transparency operations in place, sharing the average wage of women employees compared to male employees (say on companies' websites), then we could finally begin to tackle the problem.
After all, if we can't see how much less women are getting paid on a smaller scale, then how are we expected to take measures to close the gap? It's by no means a simple solution and needs to be paired with things like flexible working hours and better sponsoring and mentoring for women in the workplace. But it would be a good start.
Suzanne Horne, partner at law firm Paul Hastings LLP
Notwithstanding almost 40 years of legislation and case law, the difference between men's and women's average earnings is still 20.2%. Therefore, the report today by the CMI comes as no real surprise.
In 1975 the government implemented the Equal Pay Act 1970 in line with European Treaty obligations. It was replaced by the Equality Act in 2010.
Over the years, there have been notable cases where the legislation has been enforced but case law is still developing even decades later.
Only last year, a hugely significant ruling by the Supreme Court found that female workers of Birmingham City Council could have six years from termination to bring their claims in the High Court, rather than six months if the claim is before an employment tribunal. The claim arose from the fact that they were denied bonuses paid to male workers.
The decision means that the Council had to pay millions of pounds in back payments but it sets a precedent that can be applied to others, right up to female senior executives at board level.
After all of these developments, why then do we not have pay equality?
The answer is that a legal rule alone will not result in permanent cultural change. There needs to be business-led initiatives to drive a change in attitudes and pay practices. The solution to this from the companies' perspective is merit-based pay (whether salary or bonus) that stands up to objective scrutiny.
If they are not willing to do this, then they leave themselves exposed to the risk that the women can decide if they wish to enforce equal gender pay in the courts.
Anna Bird, deputy CEO of The Fawcett Society
Today's CMI survey shows that even when women have supposedly "broken through" the glass ceiling, they still face entrenched discrimination when it comes to pay.
Women at all levels of the workforce face a lifetime of earning less than their male counterparts - on average, women in the UK earn about 15% less than men. That means that for every £100 men take home, women are typically earning about £85.
A range of things contribute to the pay gap - these include the undervaluing of "women's work", where jobs traditionally done by women are generally less well paid than those where men dominate, a lack of flexible work opportunities - this means mothers, who still tend to do the bulk of unpaid caring for children, can find it hard to combine paid work with family responsibilities.
A sizeable proportion of the gap can be attributed to plain old discrimination - where women are paid less than men for doing the same work.
This disparity in pay is one of the starkest indicators of how far we have to go before we achieve equality between women and men. The UK lags behind much of Europe on this issue.
Stamping out this injustice once and for all means ushering in a more modern approach to work with greater access to flexible models of working, a more open and transparent culture around pay, and more effort to ensure women are enabled to play a full role in the workforce.
Given the lack of progress in narrowing the gap in men and women's pay, the government should show leadership on this issue. The coalition's action to increase access to flexible working and shared parental leave is a step in the right direction and signals to businesses that they must also do their bit. The Fawcett Society would urge the government to match this with similar action on pay transparency.


Friday, 16 August 2013

What if the price of your fair trade coffee accounted for the unpaid domestic labor of women?

Accessed 16th August

http://feministing.com/2013/08/15/what-if-the-price-of-your-fair-trade-coffee-accounted-for-the-unpaid-domestic-labor-of-women/

 

What if the price of your fair trade coffee accounted for the unpaid domestic labor of women?

By MAYA   
That’s what some Nicaraguan fair trade co-operatives are now calculating. Upside Down World describes how this development began with a sesame oil contract with The Body Shop and has now caught on among green coffee co-ops in the country as well.
There are three types of unpaid work mainly done by women: work which is part of actual production although unpaid (like sorting coffee cherries); work which contributes indirectly to production (like washing work clothes); and domestic and other work in the home which contributes generally to the stability of the household and the community.
The innovation of this initiative lies in the fact that it includes pay not only for the first and second of these, but also for the third, seeing women’s work in the home as crucial in providing a stable environment within which cash crop production can take place.
The starting point for this development came in 2008, when the co-operative Juan Francisco Pas Silva needed to renew its Community Trade (equivalent to Fair Trade) contract for sesame oil with The Body Shop. The co-op and ETICO, an ethical trading company that works closely with the co-op) both had strong gender policies and were looking for ways of supporting women through this contract. The idea of including a component for women’s unpaid work came as a flash of inspiration. After rough calculations, a figure of 960 cordobas a year, approximately $50 per manzana (0.7 of a hectare) was agreed – as a recognition and recompense for the contribution to production made by women. 
The effect of this compensation has extended far beyond the purely economic. The extra funds generated by the price increase are funneled back to women’s empowerment efforts–such as loan schemes and educational programs–and many women say they are more confident and feel a greater sense of ownership in the co-operatives. “There is a general feeling from the women, a sentiment that is often repeated, that: ‘somos tomadas en cuenta’ (We are now appreciated, taken into account).”
It’s amazing to think what that recognition would do it it were extended throughout the entire global economy.