Do we need more open and inclusive boardroom behaviour to derive real benefit from diverse talent? Will simply aiming for a better gender balance be enough if it leads women to behave like ‘alpha males’?

Sir David Walker's major review of UK corporate governance stressed the importance of behaviour in the Boardroom. When 'group-think' can be so disastrous, diversity is essential. It is, frankly, hard to think of an organisation that is best run by a dozen white men - or a dozen white women. A Board that includes women as well as men, and whose members come from different countries or cultures as well as different sectors and professional backgrounds, is much more likely to display the 'cognitive diversity' that is the best antidote to group-think. Women with the skills and experience required of any NED will have confronted different career issues from their male colleagues - and, as well as their broader contribution to the Board, will provide vital role-models to other women in the company. The risk of some women behaving like 'alpha males' is, frankly, a distraction from the real challenge of creating highly effective Boards.      

There are multiple reasons why we should increase the number of women in the boardroom. There is a clear business case in terms of company performance and corporate governance. But there is also a moral case - the systematic exclusion of women is simply a form of discrimination.  But any change should not just be a numbers game. Yes, we must be mindful of the quantity of positions for women, but we must also examine the quality of such positions. Do such positions exist in environments that value real diversity – diversity in background, in opinion, in the way in which things are done? Do such positions offer women a platform to have a voice, to lead, to make a difference? Are women provided adequate support to do their jobs and the opportunity to further their careers? Addressing the numbers is simply the first step in a long road to equality.      

Yes, indeed we do need more open and inclusive behaviour amongst the senior echelons of business, if diverse talent is to thrive. As women have chosen to move up though to senior levels they have learned to “play the corporate game,” ie fit in with the mostly competitive culture and long hours culture that is endemic in most of our organisations. The question at the heart of this is “are organisations willing to change the game?” In order for that to happen, leaders have to want to shift the culture – away from a competitive, long hours culture towards one where a more collaborative and inclusive approach is seen as an equally effective way of working. I am not talking about an organisation changing its personality here – just expanding its approach, so that women  - and diverse talent in general – can make it right to the top. Those organisations that do “change the game,” recognise that they will also gain by developing a culture that is more innovative, open to change and adaptable – a win win!       

There is plenty of good mentoring and coaching support around for talented women seeking board positions.  But there is rather less I suspect for the chairs of boards that until now may have presided over an all-male top team and be facing the prospect of a woman on their board for the first time.  Increasing the number of women on a board is unlikely to make any difference to the way the board operates and the decisions it makes if she is expected to – or simply does – think and behave like a man.  And neither will it make a difference if the chair himself cannot spot or stop the kinds of behaviours from his existing board members which may act to exclude or silence the newcomer.  Mentoring and coaching support for chairs on how to create an inclusive environment that gets the best out of everyone round the board table may feel awkward to offer, and reluctantly accepted, but I’m sure there is a need.      

The strong focus on Boardroom diversity following Lord Davies’ report has helped to publicise the need for change to ensure boardrooms better reflect society; however the board room is far too removed.  Far more powerful as a vehicle for culture change would be diversity at Executive Committee level as that’s where the day to day decisions are made that have a real impact on the people who work there and the brand.  It’s the Executive Committee that sets the tone of the organisation, it’s the CEO who is watched more closely – if only because he /she is more visible – and difference needs to be exhibited in all its forms (nationality, education background, social class) in order to reap the rewards that difference brings, namely different thinking styles, different perspectives, innovation and robust decision making.  When there’s no evident majority group then no one will feel the need to conform to fit in.      

A significant benefit of having more women in the boardroom is their determination to tactically disengage from the alpha male behaviours that can mar the quality of debate and decision making. Very few women I have encountered at this level see the need to bring their egos to the table. Instead they use emotional intelligence to actively listen, problem-solve, diffuse aggression and soothe delicate male egos to achieve outcomes. The temptation to adopt and mirror “male traits” is often more evident “on the way up” than at the point women reach the top table. By this point, they’re adept at navigating male dominated environments and both confident and savvy enough to make their impact felt. A better gender balance can only strengthen the impact of any Board and its strategic focus.Of greater concern is the tendency of some women to suppress their "difference" as they progress in business. Women and men are wired differently, be it in attitude to risk, development of talent or interpersonal skills. Business will miss out on real leaders if women aren’t better supported and equipped to be themselves.