Abstract
From 2006 to 2011, the RECWOWE (‘Reconciling Work and Welfare in Europe’, www.recwowe.eu) FP6 European Network of Excellence gathered 260 researchers and PhD students from 17 European countries with the aim of overcoming the fragmentation of existing research on issues related to work and welfare in Europe. Among the numerous pieces of high-quality research conducted within this framework was that on women’s representation on boardrooms in Europe (either on the board of directors in the single-tier structure of corporate governance, or on the supervisory board in the two-tier model) whose findings are collected in this edited volume. Colette Fagan (Professor of Sociology at the University of Manchester), María C González Menéndez (Senior Lecturer of Sociology at the University of Oviedo) and Silvia Gómez Ansón (Associate Professor of Finance and Accountancy at the University of Oviedo) coordinated a research team of 15 scholars committed to an explanatory rather than merely descriptive approach to the study of the position of women within the economic elite. The outcome is one of the most exhaustive publications on this issue, providing readers with eight in-depth country case studies supplemented by a comparative institutional analysis that also emphasizes the strategic and political aspects of the debate.
The first two chapters set the scene thanks to an extensive literature review whose virtue lies in its genuinely critical assessment of existing research as illustrated by the fact that the authors rightly point out the inconclusiveness of econometric studies (on the link between presence of female board members and firm performance) as opposed to the common assessment that usually, and inaccurately, finds that findings of these studies are conclusive (e.g. in DG Justice, 2012). By summarizing past and ongoing European and national policies, Chapters 1 and 2 moreover confirm how topical this issue is. Chapter 3 then presents the common methodological framework developed by the research coordinators so as to enable a sound cross-country analysis. National researchers were requested to report on three areas: 1) the institutional national context related to gender equality policies in general and in the specific framework of corporate governance; 2) the evolution of boards’ feminization based on time series data from the largest listed companies; 3) the actual profiles of board members so as to compare the competences of men and women and analyse the potential of gendered recruitment processes.
The subsequent chapters then illustrate the situation in the eight countries which have been selected to represent typical models of regulatory and policy strategies. Norway (Chapter 4), Sweden (Chapter 5) and Finland (Chapter 6) were chosen as illustrations of the Nordic social-democrat model while the UK (Chapter 7) represents the liberal model and France and Spain the corporatist one (Chapter 8 and 9 respectively). In addition, Chapter 10 on Slovenia and 11 on Hungary reflect cases of European post-socialist countries. In operating such a selection, the research covers a wide range of national situations: countries with and without quota legislation (Norway, France and Spain have such legislation), countries with and without gender-equality friendly policies (Hungary retreated on gender equality by favouring a re-familiarization of public policy), countries with and without a public debate on the improvement of women’s representation in companies’ top decision-making positions. Opting for such a variety of country cases has the advantage of providing a fairly representative overview of the European landscape. At the same time it has the corresponding disadvantage, in common with other collective works, of chapters being relatively heterogeneous. In particular, data on boards’ gender composition in the Hungarian and Slovenian chapters are limited, if not lacking, and the representativeness as well as the validity of empirical findings from past (and sometimes old) research reviewed by the authors are questionable. This comes as no surprise as this simply reflects the authors’ observation of a limited interest or even lack of interest in the issue of gender-balanced boards in these two countries.
Notwithstanding this limitation, the editors successfully provide a sound comparative analysis (delivered partly in Chapter 3 and more extensively in Chapter 12) whose empirically-informed findings confirm and complement previous studies. The following conclusions seem to me particularly relevant and instructive. First, the increase in women’s employment rates and levels of education combined with welfare policies aimed at facilitating the work-life balance are not sufficient in themselves to break the glass ceiling which symbolizes the vertical segregation operating at companies’ strategic level (page 61). On the contrary, and this is a second important conclusion, mandatory quotas do help to break the glass ceiling by increasing the feminization of boards and appear to be more effective than soft law mechanisms (such as recommendations) provided, however, that legislation provides for penalties in case of non-compliance (pages 68 and 251). For instance, lack of meaningful sanctions explains the very slow progress recorded in Spain (indeed I do not share the optimism of the authors of Chapter 9 on the Spanish situation). But, thirdly, even quota legislation has limitations since women are most often recruited as non-executive board members and very few of them hold the chairmanship in spite of the fact that women are as much, if not more, skilled and experienced than men, although in different ways (pages 253–254). Up to this point, this research confirms previous and still currently promoted findings (see for instance the latest European Commission publication on this issue: DG Justice, 2012). The novelty of this research, in my view, is the evidence it provides that the threat of quota legislation also acts as a powerful trigger for change. This was demonstrated in the Swedish case where companies responded to the government’s warning as soon as it became concrete, i.e. when the Minister of Gender Equality specified in 2002 what would be the detailed provisions of a potential law. A similar observation applies to the French case where listed companies anticipated the 2011 quota law.
Overall, this work is an informative and excellent starting point for anyone who would like to know where Europe and European countries stand with regard to the feminization of top decision-making positions within companies. I found this book very stimulating as it seems to be sparking new research avenues. On the above-mentioned ‘threat effect’, it would be interesting, for example, to question its applicability at EU level since Viviane Reding’s threat of EU quota law has, on the contrary, been ineffective (e.g. only very few companies voluntarily signed the ‘Women on the Board Pledge for Europe’ that she presented in March 2011 as being a last opportunity offered to self-regulation before resorting to legislation). Another issue on which further studies might be fruitful is the emergence of flexible quotas (briefly mentioned in the UK chapter) as a new regulatory tool. Indeed, the idea of legal provisions obliging companies to set up a self-determined quota and to report publicly on their achievement has emerged in 2011 in the UK and Germany with the aim of fostering the feminization of boards without resorting strictly speaking to hard law. While the related proposal is said to be stalled in Germany (though not the debate as some political actors such as parliamentary groups – e.g. SPD – and the Bundesrat are still proposing a ‘hard’ quota law), it is ongoing in Denmark where the Minister of Gender Equality presented in May 2012 a project which is expected to become law in autumn 2012. Finally, research conducted at the ETUI invites scholars, in future studies, to take into account the variety of populations that inhabit boardrooms. In particular, employee representatives sitting on supervisory boards or boards of directors, with the right to vote, make a significant contribution to their feminization as 73 per cent of female board members in Germany are board-level employee representatives, 55 per cent in Denmark and 50 per cent in Austria (see ETUI and ETUC, 2012: 105). This explains why quota laws distinguish between the different types of board members (those elected by the shareholders; those representing the employees or those appointed by the government in state-owned companies) in order to avoid that the presence of female representatives of one type compensates for an absence of female representatives of another (Cremers and Wolters, 2011: 14). Paying attention to these board-level employee representatives as specific board members which are to be found in no fewer than 18 European countries (and in seven of the eight countries surveyed in the book, Spain being the exception, but France being one of them contrary to what is stated on page 55), would thus help to complement existing research (as in this volume) which only focuses on board members elected by shareholders.
The field of study of gender equality on boards is thus far from being exhausted, not only because of new problematics to explore such as those suggested above but also because, this issue being so topical, the current landscape is expected to evolve rapidly. After repeated evidence of the ineffectiveness of soft law mechanisms, Commissioner Viviane Reding submitted, at the 23 October meeting of the College of Commissioners, a proposal for a Directive setting up a mandatory European quota of 40 per cent of female board members by 2020. Due to the uncertainty of its legality under EU treaties and due to widespread opposition, not least from a UK-led coalition of nine Member States opposed to any binding measures, the vote on the proposal was postponed until a revised and watered-down version is prepared for discussion due to take place before the end of November 2012. 1 Although the ultimate outcome of this European initiative might not be a quota in the strict sense of the word, companies in Europe would most probably be requested further to improve the gender balance on their boards in the near future with the expected consequence of a significant increase of female representation. Moreover, as national quota laws are recent and, with the exception of Norway, not yet fully applicable (e.g. the deadline of the Spanish quota law adopted in 2007 is 2015), not enough time has passed to be able to draw conclusions as to their definitive effects. I therefore concur with the authors when they acknowledge that ‘since regulation for gender parity at board level has only occurred recently, further research is needed’ (page 256).