No. of Recommendations: 19
I think you know who made that argument. Does this ring a bell?
a reasonable argument can be made that since 50% of the population is women, and that women buy lots of stuff, perhaps they should have a voice in the rooms where what gets sold and how those companies operate gets decided.
Yes, I said that. Please not I did not say 'since 50% of the population is women ' they should be 50% of the board.' I said they should have a voice . As an example it might be worth noting that just a few years ago fully 90% of American corporations had not a single woman on their board.
This includes packaged food companies whose target market was, at the time, almost entirely housewives shopping for families. Also department store chains. Also, eh, what's the point?
I am sad that people keep using the 'Oh you are saying we have to hire incompetent people.' Nothing could be further from the truth, and if there is an objective standard by which we can measure in advance whether someone will be successful I'm all for it. That, of course, is as ridiculous as those claiming 'competence must be the only criteria', else we should just give everyone a Mensa test and be done with it.
This strawman argument keeps appearing, and it's always wrong. It's amusing perhaps to find that Chevy produce a 'Nova' for Latin markets without realizing No Va means 'Does not go' in Spanish. That Tupperware was saved from extinction by a woman who, before being on the board, convinced one man to engage Tupperware parties over the objections of other advisors. Or, and I cannot believe I have to say this, that Playtex did not have women advisors at the beginning.
For the record, nobody is saying 'hire bad people.' Some of us are saying 'Hire people with different backgrounds and life experiences who are also competent . It's not that hard.
