If women and men are truly equals, then why the push to introduce women to the c-suite and other management positions? Shouldn't shareholders be indifferent on leadership based on this tenant... 🤔🤔

Equal doesn't mean identical. Equal means deserving of the same opportunities.

Shareholders aren't making the hiring, comp and promoting decisions. C-Suite is making those decisions, so the question is whether leadership is representative of that equal status. It isn't.

That article is referring to Board leadership and cited that gender diversity would increase revenue on an average of over 2%

They are indifferent. That doesn't mean women get equal chances...I swear some of you are dense

I'm a bit confused by your statement. Are you saying there shouldn't be a push for more women in the c-suite and on boards? Do you actually believe women have the same opportunities and positions available to them today at the senior level? If so, you are delusional. In banking in particular there is an OBVIOUS gap, so it's hard to believe you can be so oblivious. Shareholders should be concerned with having qualified people in the c-suite. And pushing for female leaders does not change that objective. Many studies have shown that having more diversity and women in the c-suite and on the board has improved financial performance since there is a greater variety of perspectives brought to the table. That is why shareholders should care. There needs to be a push for more women on boards and in the c-suite in order to help bridge the gap at those levels. Women represent less than 20% of board representation in the US... and it's not because there aren't highly capable and qualified women to take those jobs. Companies need to be pushed to interview qualified women first in order to begin bridging the ridiculous gap in the c-suite and board rooms.

The % of women in finance is still greater than the % of women in upper mgmt, so that's not a good explanation. And in support of GS2's overlooked point - some women don't choose finance (and specifically banking) bc of its reputation as a boys' club. That needs to change so that more women will go into finance in general. And the more we change upper mgmt from being a boys' club, the more women will make it to the top and benefit the bottom line.

I'm referring to State Street's recent release saying that as a shareholder they'll be pushing for more female leadership.

equal*

And anyone who has ever spent time in recruitment knows the inescapable truth...that selection is never and can never be purely objective. And the more senior the role the more subjective the decision criteria.

@Citi2 why do you think women are less interested in finance? Because they prefer to be nurses and secretaries? Do you think their sex makes them less likely to pursue finance? Or do you think that they have been less conditioned to seek these positions their whole lives and get pushed out of these fields? There is a ton of scientific evidence for the latter

Ugh. What a useless trope. To equalise opportunity you have to eliminate conscious and unconscious bias. And you can't do that without some focus / scrutiny of the outcome. No system is perfect that's why we, frustratingly, still have to talk about it and be creative in ours ways to address the issue.

If you think women have equal opportunities, why aren't women properly represented? Do you think they aren't smart enough? Or that because they are women and inherently different, they don't want to work in finance? Neither of those answers sound compelling to me. We need to level the playing field.

Tbh, I believe there is definitely a lesser number of females as a percentage of the overall population interested in this profession than the male population. Not saying that I think women are not underrepresented, just answering your third (albeit rhetorical) question.

@GS2*

Lol GS2 calm yourself down :) I wasn't making the point that women are less interested in finance because "that's just who they are", but I was stating that literally as a number there are overall less women in finance.
Less women=less percentage of the overall population.
Smaller percentage of the population = smaller percentage in upper management.
Like I said, I have no problem with women being in upper management, I was just answering your question. I would like to have more women in management, but we need the numbers to also make sense.

A woman would have probably used the word "tenet" correctly.

Present day identity politics and inclusive policy is just the latest form of communism, a way of achieving equal outcome rather than equal opportunity. It's just cutting along lines of race and gender rather than just rich and poor.