I’m a Brit who is lucky enough to live in America. I hugely admire this great nation of yours.
But on July 4th, I feel it my duty to say to you, America – you’re getting perilously close to acting like the country you sought independence from in 1776. Then you will be in trouble.
In Britain we are self deprecating to the point of the glass always being half empty, which may be charming, but is often self-defeating. We may still sing with much gusto that “Britannia Rules The Waves”, but it obviously doesn’t. We Brits accept that the empire has been consigned to the history books, where it will remain. I am so proud to be British – (this is me in a Union Jack outfit extolling my place of birth on American television), but although we Brits will always make a unique contribution to the world, we’re never again going to be its most powerful player.
But you, America, still are. Perhaps because you’re currently experiencing the worst election that money can buy, the positives are being drowned out. Let me remind you of some of them.
America is still, by far, the world’s largest economy, with a GDP of more than $15 trillion. To put it into perspective, the world’s second largest economy, China, is at around $7 trillion. A survey earlier this year by the consultant Accenture, found that 40% of companies moving manufacturing operations in the past two years had moved them to the US, compared with 28% that moved facilities to China.
Even if China does become the world’s largest economy (optimistic, see below), it has been before – in the early 19th century, but that didn’t make them top dog. Europe, especially Britain, was ruling many a wave back then. Likewise, America will be the real power – China’s GDP per capita will still be smaller than America’s and it doesn’t have political stability. America, you coped with the Soviet Union sitting menacingly on the doorstep of all your allies, and the rise of Japan’s economy. You’ll manage the dragon.
Here’s the thing – the rest of the world would love to have America’s so-called decline right now. The United States’ share of world GDP was roughly 25% in 1969 — and is still roughly 25%. Measure America against other developed countries and it has done well since the credit crisis of 2008. Of the G7 countries only Canada has done better – but even it had one quarter in 2011 where the economy declined. Not America, where of 14 developed world economies, it was the only one to show consistent growth over the most recent four quarters and has reported a growing economy for 11 consecutive quarters. There’s even glimmers of hope in the housing sector. In May, sales of existing homes rose 9.6% and other indicators suggest the market will continue on an upward trajectory.
Admittedly the United States’ recovery could be faster, but speaking as someone whose homeland is going through a double dip recession, we’d be happy to swap these sort of improving economic indicators. If you need further convincing, let’s just take a further look at how your competitors are doing.
We’ll begin with the much vaunted BRICs – Brazil, Russia, China and India. All are facing some big hurdles. In Brazil, there are major issues with manufacturing. Russia is an oil based economy with not much else going for it and it needs oil to be at $117 a barrel for its budget to break even. Oil is currently at around $100 – no wonder Putin looks even more murderous than usual. India has multiple issues including problematic politicians and bureaucracy, a falling rupee, double-digit consumer inflation and a rising trade deficit. Meanwhile, China has a multitude of difficulties – manufacturing in decline, the threat of the housing sector bubble bursting big-time and political instability.
Europe? Well we basically invented civilization and are now doing our level best to destroy it, ourselves first.
Of course there are issues with the American economy. But here’s the thing, when the US is down, it comes back stronger than before. The 1890s, the 1930s and the 1970s were all lows. But then came the fight back and highs of the 1910s, the 1940s and the 1980s.
America is still exceptional. Your military is by far the strongest in the world, with the United States spending more on defence than the rest of the other great powers combined. Silicon Valley is spearheading the future.
I was asked in an interview the other day what I liked most about America. My reply? That you see the glass as half full. Don’t lose that positivity – it drives you.
It is of course vital to be aware that there is much to fix in this nation of yours, but as long as you see the glass as half full, the American dream will still exist – in minds and reality.
If you’ve seen me “rant” and also quiz Mayor of London Boris Johnson about this on MSNBC, you will know how thrilled I am that Saudi Arabia has allowed its women to compete at the Olympics this year.
As I’ve just written for the Huffington Post: “Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said, “the rights of women and girls is the unfinished business of the 21st century.” The eleventh hour decision by Saudi Arabia to let its female athletes compete in the Olympics is a timely reminder to us that we must continue the fight to finish it.”
Read the full piece here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/imogen-lloyd-webber/saudi-women-finally-have-_b_1623808.html
Boris – yes, the Boris, Mayor of London Boris, is on a book tour of the US at the moment. He stopped by MSNBC and “The Dylan Ratigan Show”, where I’m a regular contributor, yesterday.
Now, hands up, I’ve always been a fan of Boris. In my opinion, of all the politicians of his generation, he’s one of, if not the most, charismatic and intellectually brilliant. Personally, it is also rare for me on American television, to cross paths with someone I’m eligible to, indeed have, voted for.
I thus gave him a hardball question on air, about the attendance at the London Olympics of Saudi Arabia, which will be the only team arriving without a woman, and Syria. In my view both teams are unwelcome guests to my hometown, subjects which I have ranted about previously on MSNBC. (Saudi: http://imogenlloydwebber.com/2012/05/03/msnbcs-the-dylan-ratigan-show-rant-on-the-olympics-and-saudi-arabia/ and Syria: http://imogenlloydwebber.com/2012/03/15/msnbcs-the-dylan-ratigan-show-rant-on-asma-assad/)
According to Boris, Syria’s appearance in London this summer is still under discussion. Saudi – with its recent $3 billion arms deal with the UK – remains allowed to compete. I respect the Mayor’s justification that sport should be above politics, although I don’t entirely agree with it. The video of our discussion is here: http://imogenlloydwebber.com/2012/06/12/msnbcs-the-dylan-ratigan-show-boris/
However, everything about my Boris encounter was a privilege. On many levels he was one of the most unassuming guests I’ve met – he arrived with no entourage to speak of and a very battered rucksack that made him utterly endearing. To me he had an honest aura that it is rare in a politician. It was immediately clear why Londoners have put their trust in him again.
A born and bred Londoner, I truly believe that we are lucky to have him as our Mayor.
In 85 days the spotlight will be on my hometown of London. Britain is hosting the Olympic Games. In my view, we will also be hosting an unwelcome guest. Saudi Arabia.
More than 200 nations will participate in this year’s Olympics. Saudi Arabia will be the only country attending that has banned females from its team.
The Olympics is symbolic. Its message transcends sport. African American Jesse Owens’, 4 gold medals in the 1936 games. Held in Nazi Germany. The Paralympics.
The Olympics is unique. It can protest peacefully and powerfully. South Africa was banned from 1964 to 1992 because of apartheid.
We must respect religion. But nothing in Islam mandates the forbidding of women playing sports. And the charter of the Olympics’ ruling body, the International Olympic Committee, the IOC, is clear. It bans any “form of discrimination affecting the Olympic Movement.”
Afghanistan was thus banned from the 2000 Sydney games. For not only Afghanistan’s oppression of women. But specifically, laws forbidding them to play sports at all.
Women can now play sports in all Muslim and Arab countries. Except Saudi Arabia. Where it is beyond the reach of almost all women because of systematic discrimination. Two thirds of Saudi girls are thus overweight or obese. Diabetes cases amongst them are increasing. Despite this, Saudi Arabia does have one world class female athlete. Dalma Rushdi Malhas. An equestrian, she has wealthy, progressive parents. Who allow her to train in Europe.
How has Saudi Arabia gotten away with still turning up in London, without at least Dalma?
For the past few months the Saudis hinted they would reconsider their ban on women. When it became technically too late, under current IOC conventions, to ban the kingdom from the event? The Saudis confirmed they would be sending no females to the games.
Activists have launched an internet campaign calling on the IOC to ban Saudi Arabia anyway. The IOC must. Exclusion sends a message that the Saudis have to hear.
For this is not just about sports. The Saudi’s ban on their women representing them is, of course, just the tip of the iceberg for violations against their rights. The women of Saudi Arabia can’t drive. Without a man’s permission they may not marry, work or travel.
The Olympics blazes a trail. Women athletes were first allowed to compete at the 1900 Paris Olympics. 79 years later Britain got its first female Prime Minister. The two are not unconnected.
What the IOC does, matters. The Saudis have played it for fools. Now it’s time for us, to make them play by the rules.
My latest piece for the Huffington Post can be found here:
Fascinating piece by Kate Walsh published in the UK’s Sunday Times today:
Glass ceiling starts at 30
Efforts to get more women on to boards must start at management level, writes Kate Walsh
Good girls don’t ask. This mantra, drummed into schoolgirls everywhere, stopped Karen Hubbard, 48, applying for the job that changed her life. She had been working for BP in her native Australia for more than a decade when a big project came up. She didn’t dare put herself forward despite being more than capable.
Frustrated by her reticence, her boss summoned Hubbard to Melbourne where he offered her the role. She accepted, and then told him her other good news: she was expecting her second child.
“But I wouldn’t have given you the job if I’d have known that,” he spluttered. It was too late to retract, and Hubbard took on the task of rolling out BP’s retail operation across Australia. It was a huge success.
Today, she is an executive director on the main board of Asda, the second-biggest supermarket chain in Britain, where she is in charge of its 542 stores.
Had that conversation in Australia taken a different turn, her career path might have been quite different. Hubbard was fortunate, but thousands of other women aren’t.
Like her, they are well educated, they have completed the graduate schemes and the training, but they hit a glass ceiling in their early thirties — just as their male peers’ careers are taking off. This ceiling is nowhere near the top — it’s only about halfway up the corporate ladder — and it means men dominate from mid-management to the board.
For the past year, politicians and businesses have focused on getting women into top board positions. The pressure is working: female representation on FTSE 100 main boards rose to 15.4% last year and about a quarter of companies have set ambitious targets to get more women to the top.
These companies were congratulating themselves on International Women’s Day last Thursday. They tell themselves that, although the problem hasn’t been solved, they are making good progress. But are they? Not if you believe the focus on increasing female representation on main boards is misguided.
The real problem exists one step down — at management level. This is the waiting room for the next generation of leaders and women are conspicuous by their absence. Research from Korn Ferry Whitehead Mann, the headhunter, found that only 15% of management board roles in the FTSE 100 are held by women. That’s only 163 of 1,058 jobs.
Yet, unlike with the main boards, there is no pressure for this to be increased. In fact, since Lord Davies, the former banker and trade minister, kicked off his mission to get more women in the boardroom, the number at the management level — the pipeline — has shrunk more than 2%. For the politicians and companies, this is a far tougher challenge, because they can’t massage the numbers of women with non-executive appointments.
“The female talent pipeline is a burning issue,” said Liz Bingham, a partner at Ernst & Young, the professional services firm. “There is a risk that we are missing entire generations of female talent that have been largely ignored by organisational inertia and lack of understanding of the issues facing women in the workplace.”
A small number of businesses are taking steps to address this. Four in the FTSE 100 — Anglo American, Aviva, Diageo and Smith & Nephew — have set targets to increase the number of women on the management board by 2015. But there’s a lot that women can do — and have to do — for themselves. Speaking up is a good way to start.
Maureen Milligan, 51, runs one of the biggest B&Q stores in the country, at Trafford Park in Manchester. Just 10% of the DIY chain’s managers are female, which may seem low, but four years ago the figure was zero.
Milligan was the first woman to manage a B&Q superstore, but her career could easily have stalled 25 years ago. “I had my son at 26 and I didn’t want to give up my career,” she said. “I went to my manager and said, ‘I’m a good worker, I want a career at B&Q’, and they let me work around my son for the first few years. I went back full-time when he was at school.”
While Milligan will never be chief executive of B&Q, she has made it to the top rung of management in a male-dominated sector. Her tactics were simple: she showed confidence in herself by spelling out exactly what she wanted . . . just like her male counterparts.
“Women have to make their desires known,” said Lady Judge, chairwoman of the Pension Protection Fund. “Men apply for jobs whether they’re qualified or not but a woman will apply only when she’s over-qualified.”
Kate Grussing, founder of Sapphire Partners, the recruiter, sees this almost every day. “It’s shocking. You ask a woman for her CV and it will be with you in a few days because it’s not up to date. You ask a man and he will hand it to you on a memory stick.”
She added that many competent women — who have excelled at school and sailed through graduate schemes — have a professional time-out in their early thirties.
It’s not that they suddenly lose interest in their careers. Rather, parenthood puts them at risk of getting stuck in the same position and pay bracket. This is largely because the big company metrics that dictate promotions conspire against a woman with a young family.
Carla Stent, chief operating officer at Virgin, was formerly chief administrative officer of Barclays’ global retail bank. “At Barclays we identified this as a huge problem. We were losing women between the ages of 25 and 35 in droves. They were coming back after maternity but then leaving a year or two later.”
Stent realised that Barclays’ requirements for more senior roles, such as international experience, were holding back these women. Once that issue was addressed, retention improved and the bank’s pipeline of senior women swelled.
Another bank has an accelerated development programme for women of high potential, which gets them further along their career paths before they have children.
Changing hiring policies is fairly easy but changing attitudes isn’t. People tend to recruit in their own image — in management consultancy circles this is known as “unconscious bias”. So, if you’re a white, middle-class man you will hire another white, middle- class man.
Tony Vardy, managing director of Korn Ferry UK, said: “The number of times you hear top executives saying. ‘Oh, he reminds me of myself as a younger man.’ These things perpetuate the gender imbalance.”
Responsible companies are trying to address this by monitoring who is hiring whom. There are also moves to create mentoring and sponsor schemes that can help talented women move up the ranks.
They can help themselves by getting even more qualifications. According to one senior female executive, an MBA is evidence that you’re committed if you’re a woman, whereas for a man it’s a commodity.
Women shouldn’t have to prove that they want to work. They shouldn’t have to spend £20,000 on an MBA just for a seat at the table — one they’ve already earned. Until these suspicions about women’s commitment as well as their capabilities are tempered, the corporate world’s unconscious bias will never go away.
This has been doing the rounds – your assignment at birth?
I’ve just written a fun piece for The Huffington Post on an alternative opinion poll for 2012’s election…