Issue No. LXXXVII, August 4, 2011 THIS ISSUE’S HIGHLIGHTS: I.     WOMEN HELPING WOMEN: KOREA TO JAPAN II.    RE-EVALUATING MICROCREDIT III.    ACCESSING THE IMPACT OF NORWAY'S QUOTA STRATEGY FOR WOMEN DIRECTORS IV.   LOYALTY MATTERS IN CAREER SUCCESS

I.     WOMEN HELPING WOMEN: KOREA TO JAPAN Sung Joo Kim (center standing), CEO of MCM, Inc and Member of the Global Summit of Women International Planning Committee announces donation of $250,000 in cash and supplies to provide assistance to Tohoku region of Japan devastated by earthquake.    The earthquake stricken area in Japan is still in the midst of recovery.  To provide assistance in this effort, Korean women business leaders led by MCM Group CEO Sungjoo Kim met with their counterparts in Tokyo July 7-8th at the Korean Embassy to provide direct aid by way of US$100,000 cash donation as well as US$150,000 in donated goods and medical supplies targeted for the Tohoku region, the heart of the devastated area.   In addition, the two groups worked to plan a five-year strategy to foster entrepreneurship among Japanese women who lost their livelihood as a result of the earthquake and the ensuing tsunami.  Sungjoo Kim, who is a key member of the Global Summit of Women’s International Planning Committee said, “Women Helping Women was formed for Korean women to join forces with each other to spread the spirit of the Global Summit of Women (often nicknamed “DAVOS for Women”) to engage in bringing women’s economic self-independence worldwide which is led by Irene Natividad, President of GSW. Our humanitarian efforts will bring the two countries closer, beyond our dismal history, and that would mean a lot to us throughout the women’s network, such as GSW.”   Participants at past Summits have raised cash donations on site for victims of the 2008 China earthquake, of Myanmar’s floods that same year, of Afghanistan’s conflict, as well as direct donations to the World Food Program for Haitian earthquake victims.  “The leadership of Sungjoo Kim in forging a direct relief program in conjunction with Japanese women is a terrific example of women literally reaching across borders to help those in need,” states GSW President Irene Natividad.             _________________________________________________________________   II.     RE-EVALUATING MICROCREDIT                              Ela Bhatt, SEWA Founder and 2005                                                                           Muhammad Yunus, Grameen Bank Founder Global Women's Leadership Award Winner                                                              and 2006 Nobel Peace Prize Winner   Microentrepreneurship has been credited with lifting millions of women out of poverty worldwide.  The provision of microloans has enabled women to be engaged in economic activity through tiny businesses that have yielded wages for them.   The famous Grameen bank, which initiated the concept of loan circles, lends $60 million monthly in amounts ranging from $20 to $500.  Women make up 97% of the roughly 7 million borrowers annually.   Yet today, women still remain as 70% of the poor, the majority of subsistence farmers in developing economies, the majority of part-time, temporary and contractual workers.  Two U.S. economists, Susan Feiner and Drucilla Barker, posit that microcredit does not broaden women’s economic horizons.  Instead, it “confines women at home or exposes them to a hazardous and primitive workplace where their agricultural activities and home-produced wares must be traded in a fiercely competitive, unregulated, informal sector beyond the reach of laws or institutions to protect workers or even ensure that they are paid for the work they do.”    Instead of the Grameen model, they cite the work of Ela Bhatt, founder of the Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA) in India, which is basically a union for women in the informal sector that provides training, health care, child care and guaranteed wages among millions of its members.  While these economists concede that microcredit may provide livelihood for some women, they opine that microcredit will not end widespread poverty.  (Source:  “Liberating Economics:  Feminist Perspectives on Families, Work and Globalization “ by Feiner/Barker)              _________________________________________________________________ III.    ACCESSING THE IMPACT OF NORWAY'S QUOTA STRATEGY FOR WOMEN DIRECTORS   As chronicled in this enewsletter, a wave of quota laws for women on corporate boards is sweeping over Europe, and yes, most recently Malaysia.  This all began with Norway, which successfully implemented  a mandated quota for women directors in 2003 that has resulted in 40.3% of board seats now held by women.  Spain, France, Iceland, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Italy have followed suit in a region that already had quotas for women directors in government-owned companies in Ireland, Denmark, Finland and Austria (as of July, 2011)   These proactive governmental initiatives for gender equity on corporate boards continue to generate now familiar complaints rearticulated in recent articles in the Financial Times and the Economist – the possible appointment of unqualified women just to fill a quota, the negative impact on corporate governance of so many less experienced directors, the negative impact on women directors, who will be seen only as quota fillers, and the paucity of qualified women.  Some of the most vociferous objections come from women achievers who feel that quotas ‘demean’ women’s talents and accomplishments.   These are the same arguments raised by the private sector in Norway when the idea of a quota law first surfaced.  Now, several years after enactment of the law, the Norwegian Institute for Social Research issued a report that counters these objections based on an assessment of the companies themselves.    ·          On ‘substandard’ women being appointed to boards, the Institute found that 36% of female directors had 6 years or more of university education compared to only 22% of the men. ·         On the notion of ‘golden skirts’, that a few women were hoarding seats in many company boards, the report found this to be true of only a very few women, and that in fact, male directors were more likely to have multiple board appointments than women.  ·         On the lack of qualified women, the report noted that no CEO or employment associations indicated that they had problems finding suitable candidates for board seats. ·         If quotas are a ‘top-down’ strategy for women  to access corporate leadership roles, has there been a trickle-down impact of so many more women directors in Norway?  The researchers say ‘yes’:  “There is an increase in women in other management positions both in the firms which were targeted by the reform, but also in other firms that were not,” states one of the researchers.   ·         Do voluntary ‘soft’ targets (as opposed to quotas) work?  The report indicates ‘no.’  During the grace period when Norwegian companies were asked to increase the number of female directors on their own, only 18% of board appointments were female.  Until a deadline and sanctions were imposed did the private sector move more quickly to address board equity.  (Source:  der Spiegel, 7/8/11).                _________________________________________________________________     IV.   LOYALTY MATTERS IN CAREER SUCCESS   There are benefits to those who commit long term to an employer, according to a study by Stanford Business School professor Kathryn Shaw of 50,000 software employees in California.  For employees with at least five years’ experience, the bulk of wage growth came from staying with an employer, as opposed to moving from one company to another.  Employees with at least five years with a single employer saw 8% wage increases vs. 5% for people with a history of job hopping.    The study was conducted for the National Bureau of Economic Research.  Dr. Shaw found that the same pattern existed in employees with lower level skills, such as those who install wind shields.  Workers who stay with a single employer longer tend to be more creative and productive than those who haven’t been with the company as long, Dr. Shaw reports.  “The more you’re familiar with the organization….the more you can look at it and say there’s another way to do it,” states Mark Keefe, an HR manager at Atlantic Health Systems.  Dr. Shaw recommends that employees stay put for 5-10 years with one employer once they have found one that meets their skill sets.  “Short-term hopping is not advantageous for the employer or the employee,” concludes Dr. Shaw.  (Source:  Wall Street Journal, 6/22/11)   Don't receive this e-newsletter regularly?  Subscribe by clicking here.     Follow the Global Summit of Women on:                                CONTACT US Global Summit of Women  1100 G St. NW, Ste. 700 Washington, DC 20005  USA tel: 202-835-3713 / fax: 202-466-6195 email: summit@globewomen.com