Episode Transcript
[00:00:04] Welcome to Transform and Lead. I'm Bron Stephens, ex CEO turned executive coach, who is all about women, uplifting women. I know what it's like to question whether your way of leading is enough. You've worked hard, you're ambitious, and you want to do big things without having to fit into someone else's mold. This podcast is here to give you practical, powerful ways to own your ambition, femininity and power so that you can lead with confidence, your way.
[00:00:30] This is a sneaky bonus episode in honour of International Women's day and the 2025 theme of accelerate action. We are talking all things DEI and it's really a personal conversation that I'm pretty keen to have because it seems to have got messy. And I'm sure some of you heard me say it's about DEI and rolled your eyes thinking, enough already. I want to have a really balanced conversation. I want you to join in because I really think that this is a conversation we need to be having in Australia. As we lead up to this next election, the topic's gotten messy and there's no better word for it. Some people see DEI as a box ticking exercise, others have started to weaponize it as a political agenda, and others just genuinely want to do the right thing. But whatever they do, they're worried they're going to upset someone. And you know what? That confusion is totally fair. I'm not going to pretend that we do not live in a patriarchal society and we need to start by being on the same page. This is not about men versus women. I'm going to say that again. This is not about men versus women. This is about a system where powerful white men historically held most of the power, and that structure has created barriers for others. Here's where it gets tricky, though. This conversation often turns into a battle instead of a movement towards progress. And we just shouldn't be taking something away from one group to give it to another. DEI should and is at its heart about lifting everybody up. So why does it become so messy? And why do we end up in this debate around men versus women all the time? And I want to give a really personal example of this one. I met with a good friend of mine and I'm going to call him Jack for the purposes of this the other week. And he's an officer of the Tough Guys Book Club, if you haven't heard of them. It's this brilliant group that supports men's literacy and mental health. And basically what they do is they create a safe space for men to connect and talk in a pub. They use the guise of a book, but it's really just about getting some guys together to have a conversation. How good is that? Right?
[00:02:28] But Jack admitted to me that he was too scared to add it to his LinkedIn profile in case the DEI police turned up and labelled him a misogynist. And the content exclusionary or outdated because it was called the Tough Guys Book Club. Now they're not reading books only by male authors, they're reading male and female authors. Whilst they are a men only group, their whole ethos is definitely not exclusionary.
[00:02:53] And it broke my heart a little bit that Jack felt that he couldn't put it up because he's deeply passionate about it and it's made a real difference in his life as well, as well as a lot of other guys. He's doing this undeniably positive thing and he felt like he might be seen as misogynistic for sharing it. And this is where DEI needs to have some serious rebranding. And I'm definitely up for a conversation about rebranding diversity, equity and inclusion, rather than doing away with it. I think we need to be thinking about it as making more room and not making people afraid to show up. Because let's face it, if there was a women's only book club or a group for people with disability, everyone would think that it's a great way to provide space for people with needs in common. So when did this become about men?
[00:03:37] Today I want to have an honest human conversation about dei. What it should be, what it shouldn't be and how we can do better without the drama. The key messages are getting lost in the noise and I, for one, don't want to see progress lost in the noise. I want to see us live up to the International Women's Day theme of accelerating action dei. Let's break it down.
[00:03:59] First things first, let's stop squishing dei, diversity, equity and inclusion into one vague concept. And I say that with tongue in cheek because I'm obviously going to say DEI during this broadcast, because I don't think I can get the words diversity, equity and inclusion out enough times. But when we're talking about it in the workplace or when we're talking about it casually, I think it's important to make sure that we're connecting with each word individually. And I think that because when we lump them all together, people either think they're interchangeable or they're getting overwhelmed trying to implement everything at once. So let's talk. Firstly, diversity. It's about representation, that's it. It's about who's in the room, and it's about making sure that different perspectives are being heard in that room. You know, are there leadership, sales, marketing, human resources in the room? Is the starting point? Do those leadership, sales, marketing, human resources departments represent the people that they serve internally and in society? As customers, you can do diversity at a multitude of layers. And I think that if you start by looking at the customer and society, you want to have people in every room that reflect that equity. It's about fairness, and it's not about treating everyone the same when I say that, it's about recognising that some people have different starting points or needs and so adjusting support accordingly. It's not about tearing down those who have privilege, rather it's just about lifting up those who don't.
[00:05:29] And finally, inclusion. It's all about culture, baby. Do people feel like they belong? Do they feel valued? Do they feel welcome? And are they able to be their whole and beautiful selves in a workplace appropriate way? Belonging and inclusion is a basic human need. And so we want workplaces where this exists. It's the foundational to mental health. And so by removing or excluding that inclusion piece, we're really starting to chip away at people's ability to feel safe, valued and included at work. And then let's talk about the business impact and why it just makes good business sense for diversity, equity and inclusion to exist. A 2023 McKinsey report found that companies with diverse executive teams were 36% more likely to outperform their competitors financially. Another Harvard Business Review study found that companies in the top quartile for gender diversity on their executive teams were 25% more profitable than their less diverse peers. And there's no credible data that says diverse teams perform worse. If someone tells you there is data around it, remember the word credible. The arguments do not hold up under scrutiny. So I just don't want to go down that rabbit hole.
[00:06:42] Let's turn to the great things that traditional DEI programs have done that are at risk of getting thrown out with the rebrand and why these things are so important, including broadening parental leave, increasing workplace flexibility, increasing equitable hiring practices, as just three examples.
[00:06:58] So, firstly, parental leave, why it needs to be equal. Traditionally, maternity leave has been the focus, but what about paternity leave? What about parental leave just for everyone?
[00:07:09] According to the World economic forum, only 40% of countries offer paid paternity leave. And fathers receive on average 22.5 days, compared to an average of 192.3 days for mothers when men aren't given proper leave. It enforces this idea that childcare is solely a women's issue, which in turn obviously affects career progression, hiring biases and workplace expectations.
[00:07:33] In the US it's almost non existent. In Europe it's really gaining traction and we're starting to see a lot more men take up parental. And here in Australia the uptake is really low by global standards. Still, there's only 1 in 20 fathers taking parental leave and 95% of the leave is still wholly by mothers. I want to be clear. Women who give birth will always need time to physically recover. But beyond that time, we should really be creating environments where they feel welcome back at work while their partners are enabled and encouraged to take that parental leave and stay home with the baby for a little while if that's what they want to do. Imagine having six months each to really get to know your child right from the beginning. Next up, let's talk flexible work.
[00:08:16] So who gets flexibility?
[00:08:18] We went into Covid and we really started to see a shift in everyone working from home and how flexibility worked. Now there's this mandate to return to the office. And with that is this very real risk that it becomes working mothers who get flexibility. And we think of working mothers as the priority for flexibility over everyone being able to access it equally and everyone being encouraged to access it equally. And we know that everyone benefits from flexibility. A 2023 study from Future Forum found that employees with flexible schedules reported 29% higher job satisfaction and 39% greater productivity. When we focus on outcomes, not hours in the office, everyone benefits. And this approach also supports neurodiverse workers. We know that they often thrive when given more autonomy over their schedules. So why not make it freely available? No matter whether you know what their needs are or not, it benefits men by allowing them time to be more fully present and participate with their families and stops them from being relegated to this traditional role of working late while mum does the pick up and drop off or putting all of the carer's responsibility when the kids are sick on mum while dad goes off to work. By being able to share that, it reduces the burden on women and it makes it feel more family oriented and acceptable for men to stay home and share that burden. Finally, equitable hiring practices or the quotas debate fix or band aid quotas sprang up as a way to force more equitable hiring practices and seem to instead have tarnished the merit of all applicants who aren't middle aged white men. And we know that's a problem. And I want to talk about both sides of the argument, both for quotas and against quotas, because I think there's value in them, or at least in understanding why you wouldn't use them or why you might use them. So firstly, quotas force change where organic process has been too slow. And this is a really good one. If we pull up the example here in Australia of the Liberal Party versus the Labor Party and their female quota versus target.
[00:10:16] If I look at the Liberal Party, they currently have 22% female MPs at the federal level. And originally they were aiming for 50% by 2022, they pushed that target out to 2032 because they know they're not going to meet it. And that's a massive difference, especially when you compare it to labor who came out swinging and put in place quotas, and then they moved that from a 50, 50 quota to a 40, 40, 20 quota and then moved it to targets because they're at 47% female representation. So you can see a real difference in how quotas versus targets shows up just in that simple example. And I think that there's real value in having that in mind when we talk about whether or not we want to have quotas.
[00:11:04] I think that they challenge hiring biases. And, you know, the biases can be subtle or they can be blatant in favoring familiar candidates. And one thing I hear up here in the NT quite a lot, because nt, bless us, we have a lot of great things about us, but there's still some traits that are well and truly in existence. And it's that old adage of if I can't go down to the pub and have a beer with him, then I don't want to work with him.
[00:11:31] And yeah, I want to be able to go to the pub with my co workers as well, occasionally. But it doesn't have to be a him. If that's your mindset going into an interview or going into a hiring process, you're off to the wrong start. So putting a quota in place can really help to move that mindset. And then thirdly, quotas hold real accountability, potentially. And the best data I could find on this was the international experience of quotas in Parliament. And in that area they showed significant success in increasing female representation. However, I like to be fair, and I would say that it's probably not conclusive data on whether it was, you know, the quota that drove it or just really committed people to meeting those targets. So let's talk about the case against quotas. So quotas are creating this perception issue and making hires. All hires who aren't middle aged white men, like we said, feel like diversity hires. And that is the opposite of diversity equity inclusion goals.
[00:12:25] And this might be a little bit controversial, but I also think that it robs middle aged white men of feeling like they're there because they deserve to be there just as much as everyone else. And that's what I mean about lifting everyone up rather than pushing anyone down. People should feel that no matter how they got the job, it was on merit. They also aren't going to fix the pipeline problems. So where underrepresented groups aren't developed early enough, quotas aren't going to address that. And the prime example of that is the broken rung. And if you're not familiar with the broken rung, it refers to the fact that men and women start out at roughly the same proportion in the workforce. And by the time they reach the first level of leadership, women have already dropped behind by 10%. And they keep dropping behind through each layer of leadership until they get to the C suite where there's only 29% representation of women in the C suite. How do you translate that into gender representation and gender equity at the CEO level when there's only a pipeline of 29% of all C suite leaders? And you compound that with the fact that that 29% are often in non pipeline positions like HR and so they're not set up to go into these CEO roles. So you can see there's a real need to actually address the systemic issues that sit behind some of this, rather than necessarily putting a quota on that might not be realistic.
[00:13:51] And finally, if you don't achieve a quota, what's going to happen?
[00:13:57] So why have a quota and not just a target? What do I think is going to be a more effective approach? Well, personally, I think mandatory diverse shortlists and recruitment panels. And by doing that it forces organisations to identify and sponsor diverse talent without making final decisions based on quotas alone. And so it removes that they only got the job because. And instead it forces recruiters and recruitment agents to really go after making sure that they have two men and two women on every short list and two men and two women or one man and one woman or one whatever and one whatever on every hiring panel. And I think it changes the conversation because you then have at least representation in the room. I think it also addresses the issue of men being more willing to apply for role advancement than women. And it does that by Making the issue of promoting women or people of colour or other minorities an issue that's up to everyone to resolve, rather than trying to force the issue, then I think if you back this up with proactive, systemic measures to address that broken rung we talked about so that we've got, you know, women in the pipeline and minorities in the pipeline much earlier, you've got a much better chance of seeing that gap in leadership and that diversity that you want start to come true.
[00:15:11] What can leaders actually do?
[00:15:14] Firstly, check your bias in your language, check your bias in your feedback and check your bias in your sponsorship. Please do not be the leader that tells women they're abrasive and men that they're ambitious. You want to be looking for opportunities to, again, lift everyone up in how you're giving them feedback. And it's often not that women are abrasive, it's that there's something else going on. You want to make sure that you're giving everyone the independent support that they need to amplify their leadership or their other aspirations and that they have every opportunity to stay engaged in the workforce. That means that if your leader leading someone who needs development and you don't know how, then you need to get them the support that they need while you learn and figure it out next. You want to bake diversity, equity and inclusion into leadership, not hr. You want to be thinking about who gets the big projects, who gets mentored, and you want to be uncovering the patterns that exist and how you're doling out those opportunities. How are you supporting diverse, equitable and inclusive practices in your leadership? Are you asking who else needs to be in the room? Are you asking who's not represented when you're making decisions or working on programs? Do you allow and promote flexibility irrespective of gender? Do you ensure people with different abilities have access to the modifications they need to fully participate? Do you ensure minorities are treated as individuals, not as representations of their entire group? And I mean, please do not be that leader who looks to the one person of colour or the one minority or the one female in a room and and ask that one person what they think they are not the representative of that whole group. They are simply another diverse voice in that space. And finally, we want to make it safe for men to feel equal and included. We want to stop making men the enemy in the diversity, equity and inclusion conversation. They're not. We want to support and encourage them to access the inclusive practices around carers leave, parental leave and flexibility just as much as women.
[00:17:08] We need to remember that patriarchy is the issue, not men. Make those who don't want to share power to lift everyone up the issue, and that includes women.
[00:17:18] Inclusion means everyone gets to express their needs and interests equally, not just women or minorities. And that conversation about dragging men down to lift women up just needs to stop. We want to see everyone going up, and we want to see that real, inclusive and diverse and representative body being what we celebrate, rather than worrying about what men are doing, because that's not actually what the problem is. I hope you've enjoyed this little foray into my head around DEI today, and I hope that you're walking away thinking that it's not about guilt and it's not about ticking boxes and perhaps have a slightly different take on it or a very different take on it. And I'd really be interested to hear both of those.
[00:17:58] For me, diversity, equity and inclusion is all about better leadership and better workplaces for everyone. There are a ton of resources in the details, and I encourage you to dive in there and have a look around. It's incumbent on all of us now to think about how we can make sure that not only is progress not lost, but that we can really start to live into the International Women's Day theme this year and accelerate action for 2025. If this episode resonated with you, share it with someone who needs to hear it, please. I would love to get the word out there and let's keep this conversation going and build workplaces that work for everyone. I'll see you next time.
