By Lionesses of Africa Operations Dept
Sadly we are not talking of the amazing FemiHandbags; Ruff ’n’ Tumble; House of Tara; Lilly Alfonso; SuzieBeauty and the many other thousands of incredible brands from Lionesses, the labels that just scream quality, trust and passion. Here we look at the labels and the generalizations that then attach themselves especially to women and attempt to drag us down.
“The Japanese Olympic Committee was discussing steps for bringing more women onto boards in sports. The male leader of the Tokyo Olympics organizing committee voiced a grave concern: “When you increase the number of female executive members, if their speaking time isn’t restricted to a certain extent, they have difficulty finishing, which is annoying.” The man [speaking] was Yoshiro Mori, a former prime minister of Japan. He resigned from the Tokyo [Olympic] committee [soon after making these] remarks.” according to an article in the Washington Post (here).
In fact, the article goes on to explain that data actually shows otherwise, that it is males that hold up the room, talk longer and dominate. The article points out: “The pattern is clear and consistent: It’s usually men who won’t shut up. Especially powerful men.” W-P
The problem comes from gender stereotypes which continue to persist no matter how hard it is to turn the super-tanker of sub-conscious bias. “People expect men to be assertive and ambitious but women to be caring and other-oriented. A man who runs his mouth and holds court is a confident expert. A woman who talks is aggressive or pushy.” W-P.
In far too many meetings women certainly feel it is better to be silent and polite than to appear pushy and overconfident. Never one to ignore a spade when he is already stuck in a hole and digging deeper, the ex-PM and soon to be ex-Head of the Tokyo Olympic Committee continued: “We have about seven women at the organizing committee, but everyone understands their place.” As The Washington Post helpfully suggests: “If you think women talk too much, it could be because you expect them to talk so little.”
The same is true of interruptions, women are seen in a far harsher light. According to a study done by Stanford University Linguist, Katherine Hilton (who is also a Geballe Dissertation Prize Fellow at the Stanford Humanities Center - so serious stuff), (here), with interruptions there is a gender bias even there. Indeed in a study she did of 5,000 people listening to a carefully scripted dialogue that included exactly the same interruptions from both men and women she found that "Male listeners were more likely to view women who interrupted another speaker in the audio clips as ruder, less friendly, and less intelligent than men who interrupted. However, female listeners did not show a significant bias in favour of female or male speakers.”
Turning back to the ex-PM (still digging): “When one person raises a hand, others think they need to speak up as well… Women are competitive.”
But (as the W-P points out) the data tells us the opposite. Economists find that when men and women are paid to solve problems, they do equally well. But if they’re told their pay will depend on whether they solve more problems than others, women do worse — especially if they’re told they’re competing against men. Women are often reluctant to compete against men, and it doesn’t stem from biology.
It stems from power.”
But where does this power come from? Is this really a hangover from the days before the suffragettes who fought so hard for basic rights such as the vote? Or the very patriarchal society that many of us have pushed away? Surely things have changed?
Perhaps data can tell us and as always, the best place to see data in day-to-day action is via finance. Given that it is a very binary result - “I invest” or “I do not invest”, results are very clear and easy to see. As we know, have seen first hand and have heard from others, to raise finance from the very male dominated finance world is still incredibly difficult.
Perhaps that is part of the power puzzle, as Oscar Wilde said:
“Those who control the money, control the future.”
The headline figures of investment, however, look good - perhaps we should be more hopeful, as was recently shown in the latest PitchBook survey of Venture Capital (‘VC’) investment (here): “Female-founded companies are raising venture capital at significantly higher levels than at any point in the last decade, suggesting that long-standing efforts to boost representation in entrepreneurship are paying off at an accelerating rate.”
However, (and yes, as readers of our articles know only too well - we always like to scratch the surface and have a look under the veneer…):
“While the trend is encouraging for female founders, the numbers pale in comparison to the overall VC market's rise in fundraising activity over the years. "One of the reasons why it's been hard for female-founded companies to attract funding is that only a small percentage of venture capital dollars are controlled by female VCs," said Elizabeth Edwards, founder and managing partner of H Venture Partners, a female-owned venture capital firm.”
Given that pictures paint a thousand words, here are two:
The one on the left shows companies raising VC with one or more Female Founders (e.g. could be one woman with a larger number of men), the one on the right is Female only (and yes - same scale!).
Perhaps this is the result of, as we have shown perviously (here) that according to HBR (here), VC and Private Equity investors ask questions based on hopes, achievements, advancement, and ideals (these are termed promotion orientation questions) to male founders of companies and more safety, responsibility, security, and vigilance (prevention orientation) questions to female founders.
So is it of little wonder that less money is raised by Female Founders? We are also certain that this is not just in finance that women are scrutinized differently…and we wonder why that term Imposter Syndrome haunts us?!?
Imposter Syndrome! There we have at last said it - you knew that label was coming! Sadly this label is once more a fallacy perpetuated through power being in the wrong hands. Men and women equally feel concerns but apparently men hide it better behind their confidence masks (overgeneralization of course, guilty as charged). However, as the Harvard Business Review (‘HBR’) say: “Imposter syndrome is loosely defined as doubting your abilities and feeling like a fraud. It disproportionately affects high-achieving people, who find it difficult to accept their accomplishments. Many question whether they’re deserving of accolades.” HBR simply saying ‘high-achieving people’, not high achieving women, yet women seem to admit to it more or are allowed to own it more. Note - Allowed.
In 1978 the term was first introduced by Psychologists Pauline Rose Clance and Suzanne Imes, focusing on high-achieving women. Well that’s a good start - one can imagine the announcement. “Having focused on high achieving women, we can confirm that not only were 100% of these actually women, but of those exhibiting ‘imposter phenomenon”, 100% of those were actually (…er) women!” Obviously Clance and Imes did not announce it as such, but one can imagine the newspapers of the day would have hinted at the large amount who had ‘imposter phenomenon’ that turned out to be women…and so the legend began!
Yet this feeling of discomfort, being slightly out of our depth, requiring a mentor, second guessing oneself and so on, are certainly not confined to women - far from it. Richard Branson, billionaire-owner of the Virgin franchise, once said… “If you don’t know how to do something, say yes and learn how to do it later” and having proved through his actions that he had no fear of ‘faking it until he made it’, openly admits to Imposter Syndrome:
Through this ‘syndrome’ there is so much extra pressure on high achieving women. Linda Hudson, former CEO of defense company BAE Systems (annual revenues a mouth watering, gravity defying $11.4 Billion, so not too shabby - “You Go Girl!”), from an interview in the book by Katty Kay and Claire Shipman, ‘The Confidence Code’ (here) sums this up neatly: "I think the environment is such that even in the position I am now, everyone's first impression is that I'm not qualified to do the job. When a man walks into a room, they're assumed to be competent until they prove otherwise.”
Sadly as the HBR state: “The impact of systemic racism, classism, xenophobia, and other biases was categorically absent when the concept of imposter syndrome was developed. Many groups were excluded from the study, namely women of colour and people of various income levels, genders, and professional backgrounds.”
Against this backdrop, the pressure is enormous on Lionesses. “For women of colour, universal feelings of doubt become magnified by chronic battles with systemic bias and racism.” HBR
This is why in our conversations with development organisations we push time and time again for them to find and invest in funds run by African Women inside Africa, so that age old biases can be pushed to one side by people who simply see a business for what it is and know the business environment inside Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa, Mozambique and so on, for what can be.
Obviously with much concern as to the wellbeing of the ex-PM, still digging, we return for one last time:
When asked at a news conference whether he genuinely thinks women talk too much, Mori responded, “I don’t listen to women that much lately, so I don’t know.” W-P.
Perhaps there is where the problem lies…
The one and only, Venus Williams sums up a book written by Wall Street powerhouse-turned-entrepreneur Sallie Krawcheck called “Own It: The Power of Women at Work” (here), brilliantly by saying:
“It's easy to get caught up in all the stereotypes and misconceptions about what it means to be a powerful woman. Sallie Krawcheck sets the record straight, showing that being a powerful woman in business isn't about being the fastest or strongest or best at playing the "man's game". Because the world is changing in ways that give women more of an edge than ever. Whether we leverage it to rise up in our careers, start businesses, or make a difference with our dollars, that power is real - and it's time to own it.”
It is easy to say don’t get caught up in the victimization of a label that has been unfairly and for so long, earmarked for women. Rather we suggest you take a look at the incredible business you have built, the employees you have, the communities you support and the future you have ahead. Celebrate all of that, hold your head up very high for what you have so far achieved (against such huge odds) and as Venus says:
“[Our] power is real - it’s time to own it.”
Stay safe.