More female bosses mean more profits: Companies whose boards are made up of at least a third women make 42 per cent more
- New report found tokenism doesn't work - firms need multiple female heads
- Burberry has highest proportion of female bosses - 3 out of 8, including CEO
- Women directors in FTSE 100 companies has risen 11 per cent since 1999
|
Burberry chief executive Angela Ahrendts is one of three women on a board of eight directors
Firms which employ higher numbers of female executives make more money, research suggests.
A new report found companies where women make up a third of board members made on average 42 per cent more profit, while shareholders received 53 per cent higher returns.
Catering services firm Sodexo compiled wide-ranging research on diversity at work and found that hiring more women in senior roles boosted business’s performance.
However, the report found that tokenism did not work and that firms needed to hire multiple female managers in order to benefit.
It pointed to research by Catalyst which showed firms with three or more female directors had a profit margin of 16.8 per cent, compared with 11.5 per cent for the average company.
Debbie White, 51, chief executive of Sodexo UK & Ireland, said: ‘One woman around the table won’t improve company performance.
‘You have to overcome the lone-voice syndrome for diversity to be successful.’
The number of women in Britain’s boardrooms has grown from 6.2 per cent in 1999 to 17.3 per cent this year, among the companies listed on the FTSE 100.
Burberry has the highest proportion of female directors on its board with three out of eight, including chief executive Angela Ahrendts.
Sodexo’s report, which will be published in full next month, said mixed gender boards brought ‘business benefits’, but warned against rigid Government quotas.
It said: ‘What is becoming increasingly important and being mentioned more and more, by both males and females alike, is that this must not become a numbers game.
‘Reaching quotas and targets for the sake of reaching quotas is not beneficial to anyone.
‘Appointing female board members should be about the richness of the board as a whole - the combined contribution of a group of people with different skills and perspectives.’
The report said the increase in female directors had stalled in recent months, however, saying: ‘evidence suggests this could be starting to slow’.
Benefit: Alison Cooper is a rare female Chief Executive of FTSE 100 company Imperial Tobacco
Carolyn McCall, head of easyJet, is the only other woman CEO in the FTSE 100 despite the study's findings
In 2011, the Government told companies to double the number of women on their boards within four years, or face government intervention.
It followed a report by Lord Davies’ which recommended the UK should have 25 per cent women on FTSE 100 boards by 2015.
Business Secretary Vince Cable said earlier this year: ‘The argument for more women in our boardrooms is clear - they bring fresh perspectives and ideas, talent and broader experience which leads to better decision-making.
‘This is not just about equality at the top of our companies. It is about good business sense.’
-
Shocking moment car ploughs through crowd of bikers.
-
Team embraces reporter after daughter's death
-
Disaffected journalist quits her job by making a dance video
-
Two-year-old Chinese boy pregnant with sibling inside
-
Linguist recreates proto-indo-European language
-
CCTV: Man punches female shop assistant in row over 41 cents
-
Security man grabs topless gatecrashers at Nina Ricci show
-
Python filmed regurgitating fully grown dog in Bangkok
-
My Strange Addiction: Man falls in love with his doll
-
Tractor driver ploughs into parked cars
-
High school band suffers seven sousaphone pile-up
-
Apple enthusiast tests speed of all models with surprising...
-
Revealed: The driver who was chased and beaten up in front...
-
Touching video shows entire Ohio football team stopping to...
-
'Pregnant' two-year-old boy gives 'birth' after he has...
-
SHUTDOWN: Hundreds of thousands will go without pay as...
-
Breaking Amish star reveals her family's shock when she fell...
-
Goodbye my friend: Photo captures the rare and...
-
Video editor quits her job by filming herself dancing around...
-
Pastor who was shot dead mid-sermon was accused of raping...
-
Community of slave descendents fights tax increase that...
-
The Changing Face of America: picture book by famed...
-
Meet Davecat - The 40-year-old who has shunned 'organic...
-
Family die in freak Colorado rock slide: Daughter, 13, sees...
Comments (139)
Share what you think
The comments below have not been moderated.
One of the biggest businesses in the world, the NHS, has a very serious staffing crisis that is crippling it due to females working only part time or not out of hours. What is the difference between it and any other business? Therefore, I have a feeling that this is so-called research. The businesses that are supposed to be doing better due to female involvement have to be named and the details of what they do and what the directors are responsible for have to be provided so that we can see what is what.
There are not enough women running big companies to come to that conclusion, moreover the companies that women head are usually to do with clothing, magazines, publishing, fashion, makeup, etc. The Body Shop is a good example. If women are so good at business why have so few big businesses been established by them? When information like this is published the full details of the research has to be made known - who did it, what were the criteria involved, etc.
Notice in the comments that its men who see right through this kind of pro-feminist, anti-male foolishness. Articles like this prove that women will never rule.
If you're making lots of profit then you've got a bit more leeway to first: put gender-equality above choosing the best candidate, second: to choose a nice pair of legs over a geek and third, think about it: the most efficient companies make as little taxable profit as possible; it's turnover that brings its owners their fortunes.
How about explaining it the other way round? Only firms making a high profit can afford to employ female executives. The others would soon be bankrupt.
Written by a woman who obviously doesn't know the difference between cause and effect and simple co-incidence
Previous research has analysed the outcomes of Norway's enforced board quota and found that when the percentage of women on boards increased by 10% profits lowered by 18% and had short term and long term adverse effects on company performance.
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
Duh, Outahere, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba, 9 hours ago
Perhaps they just choose companies / businesses that have higher profit margins