Neither one in isolation will be enough for companies wanting to send a strong message about the value of gender diversity. Clearly, our team at Female Breadwinners will help this client address their metrics to assess progress and create programmes for both men and women that address unconscious bias and inclusive management. However, that will only help secure a pipeline and it is likely to take years before any of those women reach Board level positions.

Additionally, to simply ‘fill the pipeline’ presupposes that all those in senior leadership positions now are exactly the right people. It assumes they already have a true meritocracy – a reality any Board with few women cannot in good conscience defend. Certainly there are concerns that adding positions might be misinterpreted as tokenism, but waiting for women to ‘trickle up’ is a method that is plainly not working. Women have been entering most professions at the same pace as men for the last two decades and progress has stagnated. Plus waiting sends a message that the organisation doesn’t think it has any Board-worthy women now, again a fallacy for most organisations with whom we’ve worked.

Adding at least 3 women to the Board, in a variety of valued positions or as NED’s will change the tenor of leadership discussions and help any team come to more robust and innovative decisions. Plus, such role models show more junior women that they can reach Board position. That’s far better than the ‘If I can’t even make it to the top here, why bother trying?’ which I often hear in my discussions with professional women. Instead of framing the question “Is it better to fill the pipeline or appoint senior women now?” we should be asking “How much more would we benefit as a organisation if we did both?”

Professor Ferrary followed the stock performance of each company in the Parisian stock index, the CAC40, between 2007 and 2012. He then composed the Femina Index, a separate index of companies which had at least 35% women on boards.  Over the six years, the CAC40 lost 34.70% of its value, whereas companies in the Femina Index lost only 5.28%

An article in the Professional Manager on women in leadership commented on the research – “There can be no doubt that the presence of women on boards and in management will limit any natural tendency for all-male groups to exhibit overtly masculine, or risky, behaviour – a restraint that would almost certainly have been rewarded when the bad debts were called in during 2008. In addition, diversity of all kinds would enable multiple viewpoints to be taken on board – including some that would otherwise have been sidelined – and should facilitate better strategic decision-making.”

Similar findings were reported by the Credit Suisse Research Institute in 2012. In their report on the benefits of gender diversity, they found that shares of companies with women on boards outperformed comparable businesses by 26 percent worldwide. The net-debt-to-equity ratio at companies with at least one female director was 48 percent, compared with 50 percent at all-male boards.

The study also showed a faster reduction in debt at businesses with women on board during the global economic slowdown. Michelle Lamb, author of the study, said in a report, “Multiple academic studies have concluded that diverse corporate boards exercise more diligent oversight. They have better attendance records than homogeneous boards, and they invest more effort in auditing when the complexity of the business warrants heightened scrutiny.”

Hopefully, these statistics will push the UK Government and business groups to develop policies that will bring more women into boardrooms. The glass ceiling must be cracked if we want to remain competitive in the global economy.

The team at The Lawyer responsible for compiling the list, which comes complete with video interviews with each high-flyer, explained their pride in making the list gender balanced amongst the Top 100, but also the challenges on how people were nominated. They wrote: “Even better, we’ve got 46 women this year. And here’s the thing: not one of them put themselves forward. When lawyers blithely talk of meritocracy when it comes to gender in the law, consider this: One household name firm nominated five lawyers. All were men. We ignored their submissions, by the way, and went with our own research; the female lawyer we picked is outstanding in every way. When we mentioned her name to senior people within the firm they collectively clapped their hands on their foreheads and agreed: yes, she was indeed a superstar, both in client work and in mentoring younger members of the team. And yet, this firm at no point realised that it had ignored an entire gender in submitting its nominations. The fact that we got to 46 women in the Hot 100 isn’t because we had institutional help. We went out there and found them. What does that tell you about the invisible barriers senior women face in the workplace?” Very well observed.

It seems we still have some way to go in getting senior management to recognise the potential female stars in their midst, particularly when putting people up for visible awards and accolades. When thinking through nominations for industry or internal awards make sure you advocate for other women. It’s also dismaying not a single woman nominated herself, which indicates we clearly need to become more comfortable with self promotion! Finally, think through who else you could nominate when these awards pop up in your inbox. Nothing builds a relationship faster than publicly declaring an admiration for the work of someone else!

As discussed in The Plight of the Alpha Female in City Journal: “A global economy, indifferent to sexual identity, has intensified competition in just about every industry. Globalization has made international travel a necessary part of business… And having clients and colleagues in scattered time zones often means a never-ending workday.” So how exactly did we arrive in a place where both male and female high-achievers feel they can never turn off? As succinctly described in the article: “First, new technologies like mobile phones, e-mail, and videoconferencing made it possible for employees to work in locations other than the office and, in many cases, to structure their own hours. And second, worker demand for flextime grew, especially among the mothers who were now making up a larger share of mid-level employees. Even though the government doesn’t require it, 77 percent of American firms these days offer flextime to some of their workers, according to the respected Families and Work Institute.”

We at Female Breadwinners recognise that flexibility is a gift many working women simply don’t have – retail clerks can’t ring up your purchases from home and hotel cleaners can’t make beds from their smartphone. However, I, probably like you, am part of this rise of both globalisation and technology. I sit here typing at 7:30 pm while my husband makes the Thai Beef Salad I was planning on cooking tonight, so I can get just a bit more time at my computer. I wouldn’t be here without his flexibility, and no doubt if you’re reading this in your down-time, you have felt the strain too.

Female Breadwinners has enlisted the help of Maria Sadler from Capsule Wardrobes to give us some tips for executive dressing in the heat…

At Capsule Wardrobes we deal with issues like these on a daily basis when we are creating client Capsules. We will be discussing these issues and giving our top tips for surviving summer in the City and on the beach at our Capsule Wardrobe Summer Event on 22nd May in Central London.

Our clients come from a variety of industries and range from junior manager to Board director. Whilst budgets may differ our advice on business dress will be similar for both.

Firstly think about situational appropriateness. Is there an office dress code and are these areas covered? If you are a in a role visiting customers what is your customer’s dress code? It is always better to err on the side of caution. If you are visiting a client and don’t know their dress code wear tights and a jacket – if women in their office are in sleeveless tops or dresses you can always remove your jacket. In your own office take a jacket or knit that you can put on the back of your chair ready for any unplanned occasions where you need to be more formal.

The second consideration is your personal comfort zone. Anything that makes you self conscious should be avoided. So if you hate your upper arms keep them covered. However, if like “sleeveless poster girl” Michelle Obama you have toned arms, then feel confident showing them off. The Telegraph Stella Magazine recently said “Long sleeved dresses are the thinking woman’s style weapon” and at last designers are realising that what many women want – even in the summer months – is dresses with sleeves.

Open toed shoes, if acceptable in your workplace, should always be accompanied by pedicured feet that you are happy to be seen. On the other hand if you hate your knees and know that they won’t look good bare then wear tights. There are so many good nude or 7 denier ones around now that look like your legs but better.

If the temperature really heats up swap to natural breathable fabrics like cotton and silk or mixes such as viscose/jersey, silk/jersey and linen/silk. Whilst perfect fit is always important, in the heat anything too tight or clinging will just make you feel hotter. Simple lines and less fuss are more comfortable too; avoid tight belts and shoes.

If you would like to hear more tips about summer dressing in the city join Capsule Wardrobes at our Summer event on 22nd May in Central London.

We will also be discussing:

• what most women dread – choosing swimwear
• how to make your make-up last in the heat
• packing for 2 weeks with one bag

Our guest speaker is award winning author Anne Zouroudi who knows all about living and working in the heat of Greece where her novels are set.

Bring along your summer dressing dilemmas – we hope to see you there.

This inaugural Women’s Business and Enterprise Conference is an event for women who are thinking about starting a business, for women already running a business and for women who want to grow their businesses.

But there are still twice as many men starting businesses as women, and women-owned businesses make up only 20% of the total… So there is much more potential to be realised. With the appropriate support, the potential value of women’s enterprise to the Scottish economy could exceed £7 billion. On May 9, in Glasgow, there will be a full day Women’s Business and Enterprise Conference. In addition to a great line-up of speakers, there will be workshops all day on topics on 6 themes: Early Start, Reaching International Markets, Building Confidence and Mentoring, Business Growth and Access to Finance, Branding for you and Your Business and Women in Family Businesses.

It’s an opportunity to meet other like minded people, to share stories, be inspired and find out about the support that is currently available and help shape the future for women’s enterprise development in Scotland. Get your tickets and find out more at www.wbeconference.co.uk

Rather, the challenge is in determining the difference between a “Glass Cliff” and a great opportunity.  Christine Lagarde, MD of the International Monetary Fund remarked on risk taking when speaking at Davos recently. She felt that while women may be increasingly willing to take risks in their career, companies are not always willing to take a risk on female leadership. Instead they wait until a situation has reached crisis point. As described in the Telegraph, Lagarde said: “Women generally get the job when it’s … a basket case, a lost cause – and they turn it around,” she said. Ever politically astute, she held back from making any mention of her own appointment to head the global lender and watchdog, at a time when the world economy is mired in crises.

Often, I work with clients when they are judging if a new opportunity will jump-start their career or be a glass cliff. If you are considering a glass cliff, ask yourself the following questions:

1. Who was in the role before – and how did they leave?
2. What’s the average length of time someone stays in this role?
3. What kind of public support have I been given and what kind of resources will I have?

Shining a light on these answers can help you determine where the fact meets fiction on a new challenge.

Only 2% of the world’s self-made billionaires are female, but half of them are Chinese. In fact, Communism had a few positive effects for women that are still seen in the workplace and society. China’s state ideology strongly supports female education in the sciences and in technical subjects. Women are expected to participate in the labour force to the same levels as men. Communism’s focus on equality for workers meant women have long been expected to work as long and hard as men – and be rewarded with senior positions. With gender equality at the top of many organisations scaling the Boys’ Club has been less of a hindrance to Chinese working women.

In fact, according to statistics published in the FT, this year 51% of all senior managers in China were women, a triumph of gender equality compared to the global average of 24%. The Us and UK do even worse than the global average with 20% and 19% respectively. Interestingly, in China, state power trumps economic power. Therefore women are still largely excluded from senior positions within the Communist Party of China, which may explain why so many of the smartest and most driven feel free to pursue ostensibly ‘lower-status’ business careers. Where one door closes, another door opens perhaps.

Additionally, the close family structure helps explain some of the female rise to power. There is more of a Chinese cultural norm of grandparents doing a lion’s share of child-raising, again to help parents who are working long hours. For example, there is no stigma on working women who spend little time with their children if they are working for the good of Chinese society. Indeed, the one-child policy means that less time is spent on childrearing overall. In fact, many women see their children just a few hours each week or if they live in the countryside with grandparents, they may see them just a few times a year. Chinese businesses and those that manufacture there do deserve criticism for much sharp practice, but we must recognise that when it comes to gender equality, they have much to teach us. Perhaps, China’s is not a system we would wholeheartedly advocate in the West, but it has led in part to their unprecedented economic growth.

Indeed, the one child policy and the historical preference for male children has left too many men vying for female attention, which some pundits are crediting with boosting GDP growth in the country. According to Harvard Business Review with males in the 15-to-30-year age range outnumbering females 1.15 to 1 in China, men have become fiercely competitive; it’s almost an unspoken prerequisite for bachelors to have enough for a down payment on a home before attracting a wife, says Fortune. The gender imbalance may be responsible for 2 percentage points of the country’s annual 10% growth and up to 48% of the rise in property values across 35 major Chinese cities.

For example, evidence suggests the momentum is slowing on real action to improve gender balance across Australian workplaces and in its boardrooms. The 2013 Directions Report by Asian law firm King Wood Mallesons found that only 13 per cent of directors considered diversity to be a key priority when considering board appointments during the past 12 months compared with 63 per cent in the 2011 report. The explanation is that many boards think they have sufficiently addressed diversity over the past few years, though the numbers of women on boards demonstrate not much progress has indeed been made. Perhaps, because they now are required to publicly report on their gender make-up and cite action they are taking to increase female representation, they feel that the issue will reconcile itself in time.

Certainly, this is not an issue that will reconcile itself without plenty of attention. Indeed, in the UK progress has faltered. As described in the Financial Times this month: The percentage of women on the boards of the UK’s biggest companies has fallen for the first time since the figures were first compiled in 1999, amid worries that the government will fail to hit its target of 25 per cent in 2015. The percentage of women on boards of FTSE 100 companies fell to 17.3 per cent in March in a sign that enthusiasm among the UK’s biggest companies to promote diversity is waning, says BoardWatch, the group that compiles the figures.

Concerns that progress is stalling has prompted Vince Cable, the UK business secretary, to write to the seven companies in the FTSE 100 without a woman on their board to urge them to take on a female member and promote diversity. However, a government spokesperson insisted the 25 per cent target should be achieved, adding: “In the last two and half years we have seen considerable progress with the efforts to increase female representation on UK boards.” Although the drop from 17.4 per cent at the end of last year is only small, it is the first time the figure has reversed, sparking a fresh debate on whether quotas are needed to give the diversity campaign more momentum.

Amidst this backdrop and perhaps not surprisingly, the topic of women on Boards was again addressed at Davos this year at the World Economic Forum.  The World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap Report demonstrates a strong link between closing the gender gap and improving economic competitiveness and corporate performance. The panel, included heavyweights such as Christine Lagarde, Sheryl Sandberg and Viviane Reding. They recognised that real progress has been made in increasing the number of women in top economic positions, including more women on boards and in high-level management. However, statistics around the world indicate that we are still far from closing the economic gender gap and progress remains slow. It’s an hour long video, but worth it to hear some of the most impressive minds discuss progress and remaining barriers. You can check out the panel discussion here.

The programme is particularly keen to attract women, and I would recommend it for any woman who loves Scotland as is serious about taking her career to the next level. The deadline for applications is fast approaching  – March 15, and even if you are unsure if it is 100% sure for you, consider applying – and then making your mind up, just as I did. Like every smart woman knows: Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Click here for more information.