John Gapper: It?s this competitive intensity ?crap?
By John Gapper
Published: October 26 2005 21:04 | Last updated: October 26 2005 21:04
It is unclear how literally the viewer is supposed to take anything in the latest series of Desperate Housewives, which is airing at the moment on the ABC network in the US. But one of the sub-plots must be painfully recognisable to any woman with small children who works in the upper echelons of an investment bank, a law firm or an advertising agency.
Lynette has gone back to a high-powered job at an ad agency, leaving her husband, Tom, at home to care for their four children. Her female boss has no kids and zero tolerance for domestic demands such as Lynette?s son, Parker, wanting her to accompany him to his first day at school. Although Lynette is good at her job when she concentrates, she sometimes finds it impossible to do so.
In short, Lynette is crap.
Not my word but that of Neil French, who had to resign as worldwide creative director of the WPP advertising group last week after telling ad executives in Canada that some women with children are ?crap? employees who are not promoted because they do not deserve to be.
On aesthetic grounds alone, the messenger deserved to be shot. Mr French, a 61-year-old veteran of adland, is often pictured clutching a big cigar. He was served drinks by a young woman dressed as a French maid as he recounted his past glories to his audience. And what does a ?worldwide creative director? of a conglomerate that owns lots of separate agencies do anyway?
Still, he put his finger on an awkward fact, at least if we take him at his word. He insists he did not mean that women are inherently less talented but that those with children have divided loyalties. In other words, their chances of promotion are limited not by the blind prejudice of companies but their unwillingness to do what employers require.
Although women still suffer from sexual discrimination, social attitudes have changed for the better. A lot of men of Mr French?s age secretly, or not so secretly, found the idea of having a woman boss alien and disturbing but that attitude is on the wane. Most university-educated people in their 40s ? those now in charge at most big companies ? were brought up to accept the notion of equality between women and men.
The bigger problem now is time. Full-time work for senior executives no longer means nine-to-five, five days a week. Companies place such heavy demands of time and commitment on their best employees that it is hard to combine such jobs with parenthood. This puts pressure on any husband and wife with two such jobs to sublimate one ? at least temporarily ? when they have children.
Women need not draw the short straw but they usually do. There can be a vicious circle: a husband earns more than his wife and financial logic dictates that her job is sacrificed. Or a woman feels an emotional tug not to be separated from her children while the man is more detached. Despite everything, when push comes to shove women are the shoved ones.
As a result, four decades after the sexual revolution of the 1960s, the percentage of women in top corporate jobs remains shamefully low. A survey last year suggested that only 5 per cent of senior managers in Europe?s biggest 200 companies are female. That has ill effects on society and on companies. Employers have fewer talented people to choose from when making top appointments and suffer from dull uniformity.
The hard question is: what can be done about it? Mr French?s assertion that women should simply shape up was idiotic. He said that being creative director of an advertising agency is a precious responsibility that requires complete commitment. So is bringing up a child, you fool. The problem is not that women are being self-indulgent, it is that they are genuinely torn between professional and personal responsibility.
But it is just as intellectually lazy to fall into the opposite trap of saying that companies could solve the problem if they changed their attitude ? in effect, that employers are crap. That is closer to conventional wisdom on the topic and no one would be fired for saying so. But anyone who believes it kids themselves.
Consider the market in which professional services firms now exist. If a partner has a meeting with a client that stretches until 7pm and the client wants to see the documents by the following morning, what is he or she to do? In practice, this means a team of lawyers staying up past midnight to finish the work.
A law firm that refused to do the work so fast could not charge the fees that allow it to pay so well and would lose business to rivals. Senior management jobs at such businesses are relentlessly demanding: it is not surprising that many male investment bankers in their 40s, never mind female ones, get out when they have made enough money.
That does not make it impossible to combine such work with family life: many men and women do so. Some high-powered jobs can be done on a part-time basis or be split between two people: I know several women with young children who share jobs successfully. But there are reasons why they are exceptional.
It is depressing to think that the change in attitude towards women?s advancement has been cancelled out by the rising competitive intensity of business but it is truer than we care to admit. In his own strange way, Mr French performed a service by drawing our attention to it. Having shot the messenger, we ought to consider the message.