Introduction:WOMEN are half the population but only 15% of board members at big American firms, and 10%

in Europe. This represents a squandered opportunity. There is also evidence that mixed boards make better decisions than monolithically male ones do. When a board includes a variety of viewpoints and attitudes, the bosss bad ideas are more likely to be challenged. The business case for increasing the number of women on corporate boards is clear. Women are successful at university and in their early careers, but attrition rates increase as they progress through an organization. When women are so under-represented on corporate boards, companies are missing out, as they are unable to draw from the widest possible range of talent. Evidence suggests that companies with a strong female representation at board and top management level perform better than those without and that gender-diverse boards have a positive impact on performance. It is clear that boards make better decisions where a range of voices, drawing on different life experiences, can be heard. That mix of voices must include women. The importance of improving the gender balance of corporate boards is increasingly recognised across the world. Some countries, including France and Italy, are considering signiicant action and some, including Norway, Spain and Australia, have made signiicant steps already. The number of women on a board makes a difference. While a lone woman can and often does make substantial contributions, and two women are generally more powerful than one, increasing the number of women to three or more enhances the likelihood that womens voices and ideas are heard and that boardroom dynamics change substantially. Women who have served alone and those

who have observed the situation report experiences of lone women not being listened to, being excluded from socializing and even from some decision-making discussions, being made to feel their views represent a womans point of view, and being subject to inappropriate behaviors that indicate male directors notice their gender more than their individual contributions.

Several governments are threatening to impose quotas for women in the boardroom. This is a bad idea:Several governments, especially in Europe, have decided that radical action is required to increase the number of women in the executive suite. Norway passed a law in 2003 that obliged all publicly listed firms to reserve 40% of the seats on their boards for women by 2008. Spain passed a similar law in 2007; France earlier this year. The Netherlands is working on one. On July 6th the European Parliament passed a resolution calling for EU-wide legislation stipulating that at least 40% of seats on listed companies supervisory boards will be reserved for women by 2020. This does not oblige member states to do anything, but it reflects a spreading mood. The German government is considering whether to impose quotas. America is not, but new rules from the Securities and Exchange Commission will require firms to reveal what, if anything, they are doing to increase diversity at the top table. Viviane Reding, the EU commissioner for justice, argues that compulsion is the only way to overcome entrenched discrimination. For a whole year she has tried to cajole companies to take voluntary measures to promote more women. In March, she posted a Women on the Board Pledge for Europe on her website. This allows companies to promise that women will make up 30% of their boards by 2015 and 40% by 2020. Only seven companies

have signed up so far. Mot Hennessy Louis Vuitton (LVMH), a French luxury-goods maker, added itself rather ostentatiously on July 12th. But cynics doubt that this owed much to the commissioners powers of persuasion. LVMH was only pledging to do what the new French law already obliges it to. There is a powerful business case for hiring more women to run companies. They are more likely to understand the tastes and aspirations of the largest group of consumers in the world, namely women. They represent an underfished pool of talent. And there is evidence that companies with more women in top jobs perform better than those run by men only. McKinsey, a consultancy, recently looked at 89 listed companies in India with a very high proportion of women in senior management posts and compared their financial performance with the average for firms in the same industry. It found that these firms enjoyed a higher return on equity, fatter operating profits and a more buoyant share price. The authors described the correlation between promoting women and doing well as striking, though they admitted that they could not prove what was causing what. It is possible that firms that are already doing well tend to hire more female directors. Proponents of quotas cite the superior performance of firms with female directors as evidence that quotas will benefit companies and their shareholders. Sceptics doubt this. The women that companies voluntarily appoint to boards are mostly excellent (indeed, they may have had to be particularly talented to overcome the barriers in their way). The effect of quotas, however, will be to elevate women who would not otherwise get onto the board. It would be surprising if they proved as able as those appointed without such help. The evidence from Norway, the first European country to impose strict quotas, suggests that compulsion has been bad for business. Norwegian boards, which were 9% female in 2003, were ordered to become 40% female within five years. Many reached that target by

window-dressing. The proportion of board members in Norway who are female is nearly three times greater than the proportion of executive directors (see chart). To obey the law, Norwegian firms promoted many women who were less experienced than the directors they had before. These new hires appear to have done a poor job. A study by Amy Dittmar and Kenneth Ahern of the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan found that firms that were forced to increase the share of women on their boards by more than ten percentage points saw one measure of corporate value (the ratio of market capitalisation to the replacement value of assets, known as Tobins Q) fall by 18%.

Out of proportion
If quotas arent the answer, what is? The question is fiendishly complex. In most rich countries, women do as well as men or even better at school and university. In America, most new masters degrees are awarded to women. Women also hold more than half of the entry-level jobs at American blue-chip companies. But corporate women start to fall behind their male peers right from the beginning. They are less aggressive than men when negotiating their first salary and every subsequent pay rise. Linda Babcock of Carnegie Mellon University found that her male graduate students secured starting salaries 7.6% higher than her female graduate students. In general, men are four times more likely to ask for a pay rise than women are. Compounded over time, this makes a huge difference. The higher you gaze up the corporate ladder, the fewer women you see. According to Catalyst, a researcher in New York, women are 37% of the middle managers in big American firms, 28% of the senior managers and a mere 14% of executive-committee members. Is discrimination to blame? While firms that discriminate a lot will be eclipsed by those that promote on merit (and possibly sued), that

can take time. And men do persistently underestimate women, argues Herminia Ibarra of INSEAD, a business school in France. Ms Ibarra looked at more than 20,000 assessments of INSEADs executive students. Male work colleagues of the women judged them to be just as capable as the men (or more so) in most areas, but thought that they lacked strategic vision. No such lack was seen when their female work colleagues judged the students. The way patronage and promotion work within the corporate world may count against women. Nearly all the executives who rise to the top have had a powerful backer, according to Sylvia Ann Hewlett, the author of The Sponsor Effect, a report for theHarvard Business Review. Yet women often fail to cultivate what Ms Hewlett calls relationship capital. They hesitate to call in favours for fear of seeming pushy. And many are afraid of the gossip that a close relationship with a senior male colleague might provoke. No doubt all of this plays its part. But a much bigger obstacle to putting more women in boardrooms is that so many struggle to balance work and a family. In all societies, at least for now, women shoulder most of the burden of looking after children and ageing parents. European women devote twice as much time as men to domestic tasks, according to McKinsey. It varies from country to country. Latin men are slacker than Nordics. Italian men spend only 1.3 hours a day on domestic chores, whereas Italian women spend 5.2 hours. In Sweden, the ratio is a somewhat fairer 2.3 hours to 3.4. Partly because it is so tricky to juggle kids and a career, many highly able women opt for jobs with predictable hours, such as human resources or accounting. They also gravitate towards fields where their skills are less likely to become obsolete if they take a career break, which is perhaps one reason why nearly two-thirds of new American law graduates are female but only 18% of engineers. A study by the Centre for Work-Life Policy, a think-tank based in New York, found that, in 2009, 31% of American women had

taken a career break (for an average of 2.7 years) and 66% had switched to working part-time or flexible-time in order to balance work and family. Having left the fast track, many women find it hard to get back on.

Men Dominates women in corporate boards:-

European countries are passing laws that would force companies to promote more women to the executive suite. A new French law requires listed firms to reserve 40% of board seats for women by 2017. Norway and Spain have similar laws; Germany is considering one. The European Parliament declared this month that such quotas should be applied throughout the EU. Viviane Reding, the EUs justice commissioner, says she wants European boards to be 30% female by 2015 and 40% by 2020. There are two main arguments for compulsory quotas. One is that the men who dominate corporate boards are incorrigibly sexist: they promote people like themselves and ignore any talent that lacks a Y chromosome. Only force can change their chauvinist ways. The second argument is more subtle. Talented executives need mentors to help them climb the ladder. Male directors mentor young men but are reluctant to get chummy with young women, lest the relationship be misconstrued. Quotas will break this vicious cycle by putting lots of women at the top, who can then offer their sisters a leg up. There may be something in both arguments, but in most rich countries sexism and the lack of role models are no longer the main obstacle to womens careers. Children are. Most women take career breaks to look after them. Many care for elderly relatives, too. One study found that two-thirds of American women had at some point

switched from full-time work to part-time or flexible time to balance work and family. Such choices should be respected. But they make it harder for women to gain the experience necessary to make it to the very top. What is more, big companies are increasingly global. Many want a boss who has worked in more than one country. Such foreign postings disrupt families; many women turn them down. Many also prefer not to prolong their working day by networking after hours. And many, anticipating a career break at some point in the future, enter fields where their skills will not quickly become obsolete, such as law or human resources. Some lawyers make good chief executives. But firms often want people with financial or operational experience for the top jobs, and these fields are still male-dominated. Quotas are too blunt a tool for such a tangled problem. The women companies are compelled to put on boards are unlikely to be as useful as those they place there voluntarily. Quotas force firms either to pad their boards with token non-executive directors, or to allocate real power on the basis of sex rather than merit. Neither is good for corporate governance. Norway started enforcing quotas for women in 2006. A study by the University of Michigan found that this led to large numbers of inexperienced women being appointed to boards, and that this has seriously damaged those firms performance.

Flexibility, not force

and work have deep roots (see Economics focus). But firms that address the question most skilfully will win the talent war, and reap the rewards.

5 Pitfalls That Keep Women from Corporate Leadership:Think women have finally broken through the glass ceiling? Think again. According to The Sponsor Effec--a new study by the Center for Work-Life Policy--there remain five major pitfalls that women continue to face in the workplace. And most times, a combination of these, according to the study-presented by the Center's Founding President Sylvia Ann Hewlett at a recent event hosted by American Express--lead to stagnation among female executives in that almost-senior management layer. 1) Friendship Men (2:1) look at work relationships that help them make connections to get ahead. Women look for friendship. 2) Leadership, Looks & Executive Presence "Gravitas and speaking skills are important but presentation of self is huge," noted Hewlett. Further, the study adds, "Everyone judges women on their appearance, yet no one steps forward to offer guidance. And so despite sterling credentials, proven capability, and a solid track recordfemale talent remains mystifyingly, maddeningly, outside the inner circle of leaders who exude 'executive presence.'" 3) Sexual Politics Thirty-four percent of women and 26 percent of men suspect a colleague of having an illicit affair. Sixty-four percent of men in senior leadership positions fear having one-on-one conversations with junior women because of a fear of gossip. And for many this from the study continues to resonate: "I'm damned if I do and damned if I dont."

4) Meritocracy or "The Dirty Game" An overwhelming majority of women want to believe in performance while 83 percent of men believe that relationships and connections along with bottom line performance drive success. Why do women continue to think that any other way of getting ahead is dirty? According to the study, it's a doubled-edged sword: A continued belief that the quality of their work is the deciding factor and an aversion to self-promotion. 5) Ambition & Ambivalence Women are more aware of family sacrifices. Astoundingly, the study found that after years of struggling for parity in the workplace, women as a group are better situated than ever before to reach for the brass ring but seemingly dont seem to care for it. "Certainly women hop onto the carousel eagerlybut the longer they're in the game, the more inclined women are to downsize their ambitions."

From Experts:-More women should be in corporate sector

R Anil Ambani, Vice-Chairman and Managing Director of Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL), has advocated that more women should enter the corporate world and more youth should join politics. Addressing the graduation ceremony of the Class of 2004 at the Indian School of Business (ISB) here on Saturday, he said that there were a number of women in and around the country who held top political positions. "Then, why is that women are not well represented in the corporate world," he wondered. About 17 per cent of the 220 ISB students, who graduated this year, were women. "Let's contrast this with Harvard's 35 per cent women in a class of bigger size," he said.

Hoping that more and more women would get into the corporate sector, Mr Ambani said people would not distinguish between men and women in the future. Talking on the power of youth, he said it was youth who put the country on the global map. "The average age of staff in information technology (IT) and information technology-enabled services (ITES) is 26," he said. "Why is it that the best and brightest don't want to join politics?" Stating that the Lok Sabha was being populated with old people, he said more than 72 per cent of MPs were above the age of 50 and 50 per cent of them were above 60. Twenty-five per cent of them were even older, while 75 per cent of citizens were under 40. He, however, saw a good trend in people like Sachin Pilot, who held a Wharton MBA, Jyotir Aditya Scindia, an MBA from Stanford, and Omar Abdullah. They might have inherited politics. But they had options. Yet, they chose to join politics. Asking the young graduates to gear up for opportunities, challenges and threats, Mr Ambani said they were in the most exciting times. Stating that people were going to have longer stints, he pointed out that maintaining mental and physical fitness was important to cope with pressure.

Role of Women in the Corporate World :-

1. Significance of the topic - Women have started entering the workforces like never before from the sixties and seventies. There has been a paradigm shift from earlier years when roles of men and women were clearly defined: a man was supposed to be the bread earner while a woman was supposed to take care of the household. In the US, 46.8 % of the workforce is now comprised of women.

In India, the workforce gender diversity is quite interesting. In rural India, agriculture and allied industrial sectors employ as much as 89.5% of the total female labor. However, there are far fewer women in the paid workforce than there are men in urban India. Some industry sectors do employ a lot of women. As an example at software industry 30% of the workforce is female. 2. About two decades ago, the term "Glass Ceiling" was coined by the Wall Street Journal to describe the apparent barriers that prevent women and minorities from reaching the top of the corporate hierarchy. Some recent studies have shown that women still face the glass-ceiling when it comes to top management jobs in the private sector. However, corporations around the world are in a ceaseless effort to remove this. 3. Examples of Indian women in the corporate world are all around (you all should know these names)The capital markets are important as India opens up to foreign direct investment. And Naina Lal Kidwai, who was the first Indian woman to graduate from Harvard Business School and runs the Indian operations of HSBC, has been named repeatedly on lists of the most prominent Indian business women. Lalita Gupte and Kalpana Morparia, the joint managing directors of ICICI Bank, Indias second largest bank are important figures as well. In Biotech, the biggest name is Kiran Mazumdar Shaw, who heads Biocon. The automotive industry has also been pretty important in recent developments, with a number of large auto manufacturers opening branches in India (including Ford, Toyota, and Hyundai) and with large-scale investment in highway projects and in other infrastructure. Sulajja Firodia Motwani, joint MD of Kinetic Motors, which manufactures two-wheelers, scooters and motorcycles and various auto components, as well as elevators, escalators and auto parking systems, is a noteworthy figure. Her company has attracted investment from the likes of Citigroup and

is likely to do well as the transportation business profits from the real estate boom in India. Priya Paul, the chairwoman of Apeejay Surendra Park Hotels is a business woman in a field which has a pivotal role to play now travel and tourism. Commercial real estate and the hotel business is slated to be very profitable in Asia and Paul is the president of the Hotel Association of India and leads the Indian team at the World Travel and Tourism Council. Health and medicine is an area where India offers extremely competitive rates for world class services and private medical groups like the Apollo Hospital are expected to do very well, especially as medical tourism grows. Since Apollo caters to that demand, the heads of Apollo, Preetha and Sangita Reddy are positioned at the center of the development. In alternative medicine, Shahnaz Hussain, CEO of Shahnaz Herbals which has hundreds of world wide franchises, was one of the earliest to realize the business potential of Ayurveda and alternative medicine. In the food and beverage industry, Indra Nooyi,PepsiCos CEO (and one-time president and CFO) is one of the most noted managers and has been listed among Forbes top 10 women CEOs. Shes also on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank of N York, one of the most important banks in the US. Shobana Bhartia (of the Birla family) is a news maker in the area of media. She is the Vice President of Hindustan Times and was appointed to the Rajya Sabha, the upper house of parliament. Vidya Chabria (a non-resident Indian based in Dubai) who took over Jumbo Group (which includes one of the largest distributors of consumer electronics, IT and Telecom in the Middle East as well as several breweries and other companies in India) from her husband 4. In recent times, India especially has seen a significant rise of women enterpreneurs. With waning social support, women these days look after their children and pursue their career at the same

time. A lot of women work from home and have created their own businesses. Also companies are force to rethink traditional working hours. Most companies support flexi hours in order to support families with a working mother. This change has been brought about solely due to women entering the workforce. 5. Small scale industries: Taking a detour from big corporates, rural india is full of examples of women leading small scale industries. Most self-help groups which make handicrafts, canned foods, etc. are managed and run by women. Many large corporates source from these SHGs, thus making women an equal contributor to business. 6. Family Business: According to the Family Firm Institute's annual survey, the number of women holding leadership positions in their family businesses has increased five-fold since 1997. Prior to this trend, women joined the family business to help in a time of crisis or because other options were less attractive. Daughters were rarely considered to be serious candidates for leadership positions and were socialized to believe they were better suited to take on the role of mother and wife. Now, even laws are changing to give women the right to be successors in family businesses.

How Many Women Constitute a Critical Mass on a Corporate Board?

The number of women on a board makes a difference. While a lone woman can and often does make substantial contributions, and two women are generally more powerful than one, increasing the number of women to three or more enhances the likelihood that womens voices and ideas are heard and that boardroom dynamics change substantially. Women who have served alone and those who have observed the situation report experiences of lone women not being listened to, being excluded from socializing and even from some decision-making discussions, being made to feel their

views represent a womans point of view, and being subject to inappropriate behaviors that indicate male directors notice their gender more than their individual contributions. Adding a second woman clearly helps. When two women sit on a board, they tend to feel more comfortable than one does alone. Each woman can assure that the other is heard, not always by agreeing with her, but rather, by picking up on the topics she raises and encouraging the group to process them fully. Two women together can develop strategies for raising difficult and controversial issues in a way that makes other board members pay attention. But with two women, women and men are still aware of gender in ways that can keep the women from working together as effectively as they might, and the men from benefiting from their contributions. The magic seems to occur when three or more women serve on a board together. Suddenly having women in the room becomes a normal state of affairs. No longer does any one woman represent the womans point of view, because the women express different views and often disagree with each other. Women start being treated as individuals with different personalities, styles, and interests. Womens tendencies to be more collaborative but also to be more active in asking questions and raising different issues start to become the boardroom norm. We find that having three or more women on a board can create a critical mass where women are no longer seen as outsiders and are able to influence the content and process of board discussions more substantially.

Top 10 Indian women leaving their mark in the corporate world :Although the Indian corporate world is ruled by men, there are a few powerful women leaders heading some of the major business houses in India as well as across the globe. Here is our take on the top 10 Indian women in the corporate world. Chanda Kochhar

Beginning her career at ICICI as a management trainee in 1984, Chanda Kocchar has conquered the steps of ranks ladder and has reached the post of the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of ICICI Bank in May 2009. Under the leadership of Kochhar, ICICI Bank won the the Best Retail Bank in India award from 2001 to 2005 and Excellence in Retail Banking Award in 2002 by The Asian Banker. She was also awarded Retail Banker of the Year 2004, Business Woman of the Year 2005 and Rising Star Award for Global Awards 2006 by Retail Banker International. She has been consistently figured in Fortunes list of Most Powerful Women in Business since 2005.

She was also ranked at number 20 in the Forbes Worlds 100 Most Powerful Women list in 2009. She was honored with Padma Bhushan Award by the Government of India in 2010.

Kiran Mazumdar Shaw

A successful entrepreneur, Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw is the Founder, Chairman & Managing Director of Biocon, the biotechnology company delivering bio-pharmaceutical solutions. She also holds the post of Chairperson of Syngene International Limited and Clinigene International Limited. She started Biocon in 1978 and spearheaded its growth to an internationally recognized biopharmaceutical company that focuses on diabetes, oncology and auto-immune diseases. She was awarded the Padmabhushan for her services and contributions to the biotechnology in 2005.

Naina Lal Kidwai

Being the first Indian woman to graduate from Harvard Business School, Naina Lal Kidwai began her career at ANZ Grindlays (1982-1994). During 1994-2002, she worked at Morgan Stanley as Vice Chairman of JM Morgan Stanley and Head of the Investment Bank in India. In 2009, she became the Group General Manager and Country Head, HSBC India. She was repeatedly ranked in the Fortune global list of Top Women in Business, 12th in the Wall Street Journal 2006 Global Listing of Women to Watch and listed by Time Magazine as one of their 15 Global Influentials 2002. She received the Padma Shri for her work in the promotion of Trade and Industry.

Indra Krishnamurthy Nooyi

Named #1 on Fortunes list of the 50 Most Powerful Women and #6 on Forbes list of the Worlds 100 Most Powerful Women in 2010, Indra Nooyi was born in Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India. She is the Chairperson and Chief Executive Officer of PepsiCo. She is regarded as the primary architect of PepsiCos growth strategy from the time she took over as its President and CFO in 2001. She is a Successor Fellow of the Yale Corporation. She serves as a member of the Foundation Board of the World Economic Forum, International Rescue Committee, Catalyst and the Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts. She was also considered as one of The

Top Gun CEOs by Brendan Wood International in 2009.

Indu Jain

Indu Jain is the Chairperson of Indias largest and most powerful media group, Bennett Coleman & Co. Ltd., which owns the Times of India and other large newspapers. She is an entrepreneur, a spiritualist, an educationalist, a patron of art and culture and a humanist. She also holds the post of the Chairperson of The Times Group. She addressed the United Nations in 2000 at the Millennium World Peace Summit of Religious and Spiritual Leaders. Swati Piramal

Dr.Swati Piramal who has a medical degree from the University of Bombay, a degree in industrial medicine and a masters degree in Public Health from Harvard University USA, is the Vice Chairperson of Piramal Life Sciences Limited and Director of Piramal Healthcare Limited. As Director of Nicholas Piramal, she is responsible for research and development, strategic alliances, communication, knowledge management, public policy, clinical research, planning and implementation of a new clinical research organization. She has been the Vice President of Assocham in 2008 and was elected as its President in 2009.

Mallika Srinivasan

Mallika Srinivasan is the Director of Tractors and Farm Equipment Ltd (TAFE). Upon completing her MA in econometrics from Madras University, she went to the U.S. and did her MBA from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Joining the family business in 1986, she gradually converted TAFE into a hitechnology company and within a span of 2 decades, she accelerating its revenue turnover from 85 crores to 2900 crores. Preetha Reddy

Preetha Reddy is the Managing Director of Apollo Hospitals, one of the largest healthcare conglomerates of India. She is also one of pioneer businesswomen of India in the segment of healthcare industry. Under her leadership, the Apollo Specialty Hospital grown to a level of being known as a major oncology referral centre in Asia. Apollo is also considered to be one of the few places with facility to offer bone marrow transplantation. The hospital was first to perform cord blood transplantation in India. She was graduated in Chemistry from the University of Madras and has a post graduate degree in Public Administration. Priya Paul

Priya Paul is the Chairperson of Appeejay The Park Hotels chain of boutique hotels. She joined the company at the age of 22 after finishing her studies in Economics at the Wellesley College. With just two years of experience working under her father, she had to take charge of the hotel chain when her father Surrendra Paul was gunned down by the ULFA militants in Assam. She has been recognized by Forbes online as one of Indias 100 most powerful businesswomen. She also got many other recognitions such as Young Entrepreneur of the Year award 1999-2000, Businessperson of the year 2002-2003 etc.

Sulajja Firodia Motwani

Sulajja Motwani is the Managing Director of Kinetic Motor Company who looks after the companys overall business developmental activities. She also heads the Kinetic Marketing Services Limited and Kinetic Finance. She has been widely acknowledged for single-handedly designing and developing the marketing strategies to spearhead the companys growth forward. She completed B.Com from Pune University and MBA from Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburg after which she joined Barra International, California, an investment consulting firm in the U.S. She was rewarded with the Young Achievers Award for Business in the year 2002, Global Leader of Tomorrow by the World Economic Forum in 2002 and was named the Face of the Millennium by India Today.