Having women on boards isn't just a question of numbers!
The egalitarian presence of women on boards of directors should be on a double-pronged basis: in quantity and in quality of positions.
Indeed, it is fundamental for women to be also on the decisive committees or why not as the chairperson of the board and not only to be confined unfortunately as it is the case often currently on non-decisional committees or squarely on any committee at all.
The challenge of 'female' good governance within companies should not be limited to whether public or private companies appoint any women on the boards of directors and give us the percentages of female members present within their boards of directors or associations but also the distribution of their roles within these boards of directors.
We must avoid the presence of women being seen as a figuration imposed by law.
Indeed, many jurisdictions, in the name of 'good governance, impose a quota of female presence on board of directors for certain type of companies or associations. This is why it is essential that women’s role be not perceived as 'a necessary evil' by their male colleagues but conversely as an important addition to the functional and executive needs of the council.
It’s essential for women’s credibility on governance matters that boards don't name any woman just to meet the quota.
Competent women must be appointed so that they can also be on decision-making committees.
This is all the more true for example in fields dominated by men, as for example in sports organizations. Very few women are chair of the board of directors or vice-president or on finance committees or on any committees at all. So when they are on the board, they are more often than not, silent and we as ‘women in governance’ are not more advanced.
What we say:?
We need the EGALITARIAN presence of COMPETENT women in QUALITY positions on boards of directors.