$900 Billion Women

Fortune Magazine's October 16 issue, The 50 Most Powerful Women in Business, blows to smithereens the myth that ambitious women are opting out of work in favor of domestic tranquility. The issue features five different covers showcasing the United States' top seven female CEOs: Indra Nooyi (PepsiCo), Anne Mulcahy (Xerox), Meg Whitman (eBay), Pat Woertz (Archer Daniels Midland), Irene Rosenfeld (Kraft Foods), Brenda Barnes (Sara Lee) and Andrea Jung (Avon). The issue profiles the top 50 most successful women in business. The top 25 alone account for more than $900 billion in market capitalization and $250 billion in annual revenues. These stars range in age from 39 to 60; many have children, several do not.

There is no doubt these are powerful mamas. Our economy is thriving in part because of them -- and because our capitalist culture has expanded over the last 40 years to let these women, and their innovative, creative, competitive minds into corporate America. Many companies now realize that longterm success depends upon attracting the most talented employees -- male and female -- and this is good for everyone, no matter what our gender or our choices about combining work and kids.

But I wonder: Are parents overall better off for having women at the helm of Fortune 500 companies, controlling billions of dollars in spending and overseeing millions of employees? Are female leaders better suited to creating corporate cultures that help parents balance work and family? Or are men today just as good (or bad) at helping companies develop supportive, flexible policies for employees?

I've seen both. My best work/life situation came about when I worked for a division of Johnson & Johnson, headed by an insightful, supportive male president who was ably advised by a strong, far-thinking female head of human resources. My family and I benefitted from subsidized on-site daycare, I was given the freedom to work two days per week at home, and the company allowed me to work long-distance, part-time when my husband's job necessitated our move to Minnesota for two years.

I've had great female bosses and hard-charging, insensitive female bosses during my career. At times, I wish the solution to better work/family balance for everyone was as simple as getting more women into positions of power. My conclusion, so far, is that some ambitious people, regardless of gender, understand that a critical part of gaining employee loyalty and increasing productivity is offering work/life support; many others of both genders do not. Bad bosses come in all packages.

How about you? What type of boss would you rather work for: man, woman, parent, non-parent? What type of person runs your company? What role --if any -- does someone's gender and life experience play in their ability to promulgate innovative, smart work/life programs for employees?

By Leslie Morgan Steiner |  November 8, 2006; 7:00 AM ET  | Category:  You Go Girl!
Previous: Vote Today | Next: Children Aside, We're All In This Together

Name:

Comments: