Women WOmen

1y ago
2.00 MB
20 Pages
Last View : 18d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Kamden Hassan

WomenWomenin LeadershipA Look at Companies in theS&P MidCap 400 Index, 2000–2010

WomenWomenin LeadershipABOUT USThe Center for Women in Business (CWB), a project of the U.S.Chamber of Commerce’s Campaign for Free Enterprise, promotesand empowers women business leaders to achieve their personal andprofessional goals by increasing opportunities for women to serve oncorporate boards and in the C-suite; mentoring women in the early stagesof their careers or re-entering the workforce; and building a network ofwomen entrepreneurs to encourage peer-to-peer networking, education,and professional growth.Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business is a premierbusiness school located at the center of world politics and business inWashington, D.C. Some 1,400 undergraduates, 1,000 MBA students,and 1,200 participants in executive education programs study businesswith an intensive focus on leadership and a global perspective.Founded in 1957, the business school today resides in the new Rafik B.Hariri Building, a state-of-the-art facility that blends the tradition ofGeorgetown University with forward-thinking functionality. For moreinformation about Georgetown’s McDonough School of Business, visithttp://msb.georgetown.edu.The National Chamber Foundation (NCF), a non-profit affiliate of the U.S.Chamber of Commerce, is dedicated to identifying and fostering publicdebate on emerging critical issues. We provide business and governmentleaders with insight and resources to address tomorrow’s challenges.NCF’s resources and programs focus on three goals—to (I) examineemerging business issues, (II) drive public debate, and (III) informbusiness and government leaders. We offer research programs, roundtablesand conferences, and leadership development initiativesThe U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world’s largest businessorganization representing the interests of more than 3 million businessesof all sizes, sectors, and regions.2

Women in business are redefining the game throughout America’s freeenterprise system. They are marked by a spirit of entrepreneurship that iscritical to our economy’s success and the development of a 21st centuryworkforce. In partnership with Georgetown University, the U.S. Chamber ofCommerce is proud to publish this groundbreaking research on the womenwho lead America’s mid-cap companies. These are the leaders who play anintegral role in business, who create lasting value.Challenges to businesswomen remain in these tough economic times.Though women represent half of America’s workforce, they make up only5.7 percent of the executive ranks in mid-cap companies. In our freeenterprise system, talent knows no gender and opportunity no bounds.We can and must do better.Executive Vice President andChief Operating OfficerU.S. Chamber of Commerce andPresident, Center for Womenin BusinessThe informative and often surprising results contained in this report will beinvaluable resources to businesses. It points to how companies can betterincorporate women into their workforce and develop them into the leadersof tomorrow. It also identifies industries and regions of the country whereimprovements are needed to fully capitalize on the leadership women canprovide. Based on the data, it is clear that more research remains to be doneon the shifting demographics and changing dynamics of today’s workplace.Companies have a unique opportunity to devise a strategy that enablestalented women to advance in the workplace.Through the Center for Women in Business, the U.S. Chamber ofCommerce will continue in its commitment to educate, facilitate, andcommunicate the critical role of women in the workforce. Advancing thegoals of women, especially in positions of leadership, remains an essentialpriority of the Chamber for the years ahead.Sincerely,David C. Chavern3

WomenWomenin LeadershipIt is with much pleasure that I write on behalf of Georgetown University’sMcDonough School of Business in Washington, D.C., upon the release ofimportant research on women at the top echelon of management in mediumsized corporations.The study in this publication looks specifically at female participation intop management of the S&P MidCap 400 from 2000 – 2010. A great dealof knowledge already exists about female executive representation in large(Fortune 500, S&P 500) companies, but less is known about the womenworking in small- and medium-size organizations. Only by shining lightupon women in companies of all sizes can we be able to understand fullytheir experiences and help to improve their success and, ultimately, that ofthe U.S. business sector at large.Senior Associate Deanfor Executive Education,McDonough School of BusinessGeorgetown UniversityThis research is the first major project between the Georgetown UniversityMcDonough School of Business and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’sCenter for Women in Business. Through our partnership, we look forwardto widening opportunity and promoting professional growth for womenthroughout the nation.Sincerely,Paul Almeida4

Women in LeadershipA Look at Companies in the S&P MidCap400 Index, 2000–2010In an ever-competitive global economy, companies that identify and develop leaderswho drive innovation and produce results will succeed. Today, nearly 50% ofAmerica’s workforce are women, and while women continue to move into leadershiproles, there is still more to be done. That’s why the U.S. Chamber of Commerce andits Center for Women in Business partnered with Georgetown University to examinewomen as business leaders. This includes research on small, medium, and largeenterprises as well as women entrepreneurs.This research focuses on women’s participation in the top management ranks of thecompanies featured in the Standard & Poor’s (S&P) MidCap 400 listing from 2000to 2010. The findings of this research provide valuable information for businesses asthey plan and implement their leadership strategies.We have chosen to focus on mid-cap companies—those with 1 billion to 7billion in market capitalization—in order to complement the extensive research thatcurrently exists on female executive representation in large Fortune 500 or S&P 500companies. The data used in this study come from the annual reporting by mid-capcompanies to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.Women who serve as executives in America’s leading mid-cap companies are all toooften overlooked. Compared with the number of studies of gender issues at largercompanies in the Fortune 500 or the S&P 500, research on the gender demographyin smaller companies is relatively scant. Yet, it is unclear whether findings aboutwomen in larger organizations generalize to those in smaller companies as well.The analysis presented in this study focuses on the gender makeup of the top fiveexecutives of companies that comprise the S&P MidCap 400 Index from the years2000 to 2010. In addition to examining the percentage of women at this very toplevel over time, this report looks at their compensation relative to that of their malecolleagues. As we explain below, the increase in available data, coupled with therecession, created a particularly interesting situation in the years 2006 to 2010. Thisperiod is where we focus most of our attention.Over the past decade, the average percentage of women in the top executive ranksof the mid-cap firms in the United States totaled 5.7%. This number did not comeabout through consistent growth from 2000 to 2010. Rather, the level of femaleparticipation increased through the middle part of the decade and then rapidlydropped in 2009 and 2010.We examine women’s representation in the top executive ranks of these mid-capfirms from a number of different perspectives, such as age, location, industry, and thestatus of these executives within their firm. Indeed, looking at different age clustersof executives reveals that younger female executives (between 27 and 39 years old)5

WomenWomenin Leadershipsuffered a decline in their ranks starting earlier than the other executives (2006 ratherthan 2008). Moreover, the percentage of older female executives (aged 60 and above)seemed to stay the most consistent, albeit at an already low level.The location of a company also appears to have an impact on female participation at theexecutive level. The Northeast region of the United States enjoyed the highest percentage offemale executives, while the Midwest consistently ranks at the bottom. Preliminary studyappears to show that the differences among regions in the percentage of female executiveshave much to do with the types of industries that dominate in each area of the country.Throughout the United States, a large difference exists between industries based on therepresentation of women in their executive ranks. Women make up more than 10% ofexecutives in three industries: media, life sciences, and retailing. Mid-cap automobilesand components industry had no female executives from 2000 to 2010.Another finding is that the gap in compensation between male and female executivesappears to be narrowing. In fact, women in some industries are outperforming men interms of compensation. Nevertheless, the average percentage of women who becameexecutives and garner this level of compensation remains low. There is still a long way to go.What Is the S&P MidCap 400?The S&P MidCap 400 Index is a relatively stable set of midsized, U.S.-based, publiclytraded firms, chosen to mirror the characteristics of the larger population of midsized firms.The index covers more than 7% of the U.S. equity market1 and seeks to remain an accuratemeasure of midsized companies. To qualify for this index, a company must have a marketcapitalization in the range of 1 billion to 7 billion, though this range is regularly reviewedto ensure consistency with market conditions. In addition to being located in the UnitedStates, companies must meet specific criteria for liquidity, market capitalization, public float,and sector classification, and must be financially viable with four consecutive quarters ofpositive reported earnings.2 Index constituent turnover is minimized, and additions to theindex occur only when deletions are made in response to a merger, acquisition, or substantialviolation of index criteria.3 Such changes are made on an as-needed basis.As of February 20, 2012, the top five S&P MidCap 400 constituents are Green MountainCoffee Roasters, Inc.; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Monster Beverage Corp.;AMETEK, Inc.; and Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Other S&P MidCap companies includeAnn Taylor, AOL, DreamWorks Animation, JetBlue, Netflix, and Nordstrom.4According to U.S. law, all publicly traded companies must report their top five executives(in terms of earning) to the Securities and Exchange Commission. They report not onlythe gender of these top five executives, but also their earnings in terms of salary, bonus,and other compensation, such as stock and deferred options. The data from these filingswere used in this analysis.Looking at the most recent decade of available data (2000–2010), figure 1 shows thatreporting practices began to increase during the middle of the decade, with a near 99%compliance rate toward the decade’s end.6

We believe that this increase in reporting is likely due to changes in the regulatoryenvironment and improvements in the online mechanisms by which companies filedtheir reports. This near-perfect level of reporting by midsized companies offers a robustsnapshot of the executive suite.Figure 1: Number of Companies 004200520062007200820092010Figure 1: Number of Companies Reporting400Gender Demographics in theExecutive Suite350300250200150 2000 to 2010, women represented 5.7% of the leading executives in the S&P 400Fromindex100 of mid-cap companies. (In this study, “executives” refers to the top five highestpaid50 members of staff, unless otherwise noted.) As figure 2 shows, this number wasrelativelystable for Figurethe first halfthe decade,Executivesand then appearedto rise from 2006 to02:ofFemale2000-20102000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20102008 before8falling off rather precipitously in 2009 and 2010. Thus, it seems that womenwere making7a slow and steady climb into the top levels of midsized corporations as thedecade progressed—thatis, until the start of the global economic contraction in 20086which suggests5 that this gender trajectory may mirror the broader economic trajectory.4What is most3 interesting to us about this decline is that some people have arguedthat the “great2 recession” had a greater impact on male employment levels thanfemale employmentlevels.5 Women were thought to be more “recession proof.” In1approximately0 27% of American dual-income households in 2010, the wife was 0Figure 2: Female Executives 2000-201087654Figure 3:Female 200752008433221100Figure 4: Non-CEOFemale Executives200920107

200200150150WomenWomen1001005050in Leadership0020002000 20012001 20022002 20032003 20042004 20052005 20062006 20072007 20082008 20092009 20102010more than the husband.6 Moreover, single women without children between the ages of22 and 30 were earning more than their male counterparts of the same age in many ofthe largest cities in the United States.7These findings are balanced by data that suggests the recession hurt women’s chances ofsurviving the top ranks of the executive suite—at least for mid-cap firms. There may bemore gender equality (in terms of numbers and salary) in the lower levels of the firm,but in the executivesuitethepercentageof women2000-2010decreasedsignificantly from 2008 2000-2010882009 and then again from 2009 to 2010.77Figure6 36focuses on the years after 2005, where we see the most significant rise and fall55of femaleexecutives in mid-cap companies. The first bar of figure 3 shows the average44percentage of female executives in the mid-cap firms between 2000 and 2005, and the3second 3through sixth bars show the percentage of women for each subsequent year22individually.We present the information this way because our later analyses focus on the11second0 0half of the decade. Because the beginning half of the decade was relatively stable in20022003200720092000 200120012002 numbers,2003 20042004200520062007 2008200820092010terms of 2000femaleexecutivewe2005show2006the averageof thisfirst2010half for reference andcomparison and then show 2006 to 2010 in greater detail.Figure 4 shows the same data, but focuses solely on non-CEO female executives.8 87 7776 6665 5554 4443 3332 2221 1110 02000-2005 20062006 20072007 20082008 20092009 aleFemaleExecutivesExecutives002000-2005 20062006 20072007 20082008 20092009 201020102000-2005Age of ExecutivesBased on an analysis of executive representation by women among mid-cap companies,younger female executives appear to be more vulnerable to recessionary pressures thantheir older counterparts.Younger women were more strongly represented in the executive pool in 2006 than inlater years. Figure 5 shows the percentage of female executives grouped by their ages.There is a significant drop in the percentage of younger female executives, ranging in agesfrom 27 to 39, starting in 2006. In 2006, younger female executives represented 15% ofthe overall leadership in mid-sized firms. Just a year later, that proportion had dropped to9.3%. By 2009, younger female executives occupied only 3% of these leadership positions.These same drops in employment shares occurred across nearly every other female age8

group. The only age group of women that is consistently represented on the executivelevel is ages 60 or older. Indeed, the percentage of female executives over the age of 70appears to be increasing, though their overall number remains low when compared withtheir male counterparts.Figure 5: Percentage Female ExecutivesOver Time by Age15Figure 5: Percentage Female ExecutivesOver Time Femaleby Age ExecutivesFigure 5: PercentageOver Time by Age1227-3940-4950–5960-6970 20082009200920102010129 396 072008200920102000-052006200720082009201015 91215 6Although figure 5 appears to represent a fairly significant female representation in theexecutive suite,particularly40-49in the 40 to 49and 50 to 5960-69age ranges, this70 is still a relatively27-3950–59small lappreciationfor this27-3940-4950–59 Cap Age60-6970 Figure 6: Mid2006100 figures 6 and 7 present the percentages of female and male executives back todifferential,back for eachage group. Figure 6 shows these percentages for 2006 and figure 7 for 2010.80Figure 6: Mid Cap Age 2006100 60Figure 6: Mid Cap Age 2006100408080206060 040Female MaleFemale Male Female MaleFemale MaleFemale Male4027-3940-4950–5960-6970 20200Female Male Female MaleFemale MaleFemale Male0 Female MaleFemale27-39 Male27-39100Female40-49 Male Female50–59 MaleFigure7: MidCap40-4950–59Female60-69 MaleAge60-692010Female70 Male70 80Figure 7: Mid Cap Age 201060Figure 7: Mid Cap Age 2010100100408080206060 040Female MaleFemale Male Female MaleFemale MaleFemale Male4027-3940-4950–5960-6970 20200Female Male Female MaleFemale MaleFemale Male0 Female MaleFemaleMaleFemaleMale 0-6970 Male8:FemaleExecutivesby Region27-3940-4950–5960-6970 NortheastMidwestSouth8West1010 610Figure 8: Female Executives by RegionFigure 8: Female Executives by RegionNortheastNortheast9

WomenWomenFigure 7: Mid Cap Age 2010100in Leadership806040RegionWhere the Company Is Based200 8 shows the percentage of female executives in the S&P mid-cap companies byFigureFemale MaleFemale Male Female MaleFemale MaleFemale Maleregion of the 27-39country for the40-49second half of thedecade. The60-69Northeast regionconsisted50–5970 of 87 companies, the Midwest of 126 companies, the South of 84 companies, and theWest of 87 companies.10Figure 8: Female Executives by 07200820092010As figure 8 shows, the Northeast has the highest percentage of women in executiveroles. The Northeast and Midwest peaked in 2008 with 9% and 5.9%, respectively.Both regions significantly dipped in their percentages of female executives in 2009.In contrast, the South showed a more gradual decline after 2008, whereas the Westshowed a gradual decline starting in 2005. It is possible that changes in the moremacroeconomic environment of these regions explain this fluctuation, but furtherregional analysis must be done to permit any confident inferences about root causes.Figure 9: Percentage of Women in ExecutiveRoles by 92010Figure 9 shows thesame data, but inbar chart format.These bar chartsare layered on topof a map of theUnited States toclearly demarcatehow states werecategorized in thebroader regionalanalysis.Figure 10: Industries with AverageFemale Executives Below 5%

Industry SectorsFigure 9: Percentage of Women in ExecutiveSectioning the data by industryoffers anotherpicture of where women are advancingRolesby Regionin business leadership. The industries with the highest average number of femaleexecutives include media (21%), pharmaceutical (14%), and retailing (13%). Theindustries with the lowest average number of female executives are semiconductors(2%), transportation (2%), energy (2%), and automobiles and components (0percent). The telecom, food and staples retailing, and household and personal productsindustries were excluded, because in these industries the actual number of reportedexecutives is too low to determine any meaningful gender differences or significance inpercentage shifts over time.In many industries, the top leadership consists of fewer than 5% women. These industriesinclude auto and components, capital goods, consumer durables and apparel, diversifiedfinancials, energy,insurance, 6materials, real estate,semiconductors, tech hardware and6108equipment, and transportation.These industrynumbers are7 graphed in figure 00-200520062007200820092010As figure 10 shows, the biggestdecline is in theconsumer durablesand apparel industry,33443with a 3.9 percentage point dropfrom 2009 to2010. Prior to 2010, the consumer222durables industryran counter1 to the overall nationaltrends,21 with steady increases in its100count of femaleexecutives from4.5% in 20060 to 6.9% in 2009.Transportation is the0most stable sector, with women consistently accounting for just under 2% of the overalltotal of executives.6Figure 10: Industries with AverageFemale Executives Below 5%76543210Auto & ComponentsCapital GoodsConsumer Durables & ApparelDiversified FinancialsEnergyInsuranceMaterialsReal EstateSemiconductorsTech Hardware& EquipmentTransportation11

WomenWomenin LeadershipFigure 11 depicts the percentage of female executives in the seven industries that have between5% and 10% female executives. These industries are banks; consumer services; food, beverage,and tobacco; healthcare equipment and services; professional services; software; and utilities.As figure 11 shows, healthcare equipment starts at 9% in 2006 and drops to 4% by 2010.Professional services spikes in 2008 to 10.1%, but quickly returns to the average 5% by 2010.The software, banking, and utilities sectors maintained steady averages of 5%, 5%, and 7.4%,respectively. The notable drop-offs in the representation of female executives in these industriesmay be directly related to the recessionary conditions felt through the latter years of the decade.Figure 11: Industries with AverageFemale Executives Between 5-10%Figure 11: Industries with Average12Female Executives Between 5-10%101281068462402BanksHousehold & Personal ProductsConsumer ServicesProfessional Services0Food, Bev & esBanksHousehold& Personal ProductsConsumer ServicesProfessional ServicesFigure12 depictsthe three industries with more than10% female executives. Media, retailing,Food,Bev & TobaccoSoftwareand thelarger groupingof &pharmaceutical,biotech,and life sciences industries hold n. The media industry started strong in 2006, with 29% of the sector’s executivesbeing women, but dropped to 18% by the end of the decade. The pharmaceutical industryhas consistently maintained an average of 13% female executives. Although this industry doesFigure12: Industriesnot show the highest percentageof femaleexecutives, the withstabilityAverageof the percentage over timeFemaleExecutivesAboveis10%(with a relatively higher base ratecomparedwith other industries)worth noting.3025Figure 12: Industries with AverageFemale Executives Above 10%3020251520MediaPharma,BioTech,Life SciencesMediaRetailingPharma,BioTech,Life 7200820082009200920102010

Executive CompensationAccording to our data, the gap between male and female compensation may be closing overtime. Figures 13 and 14 show the realized and potential compensation for men and womenover time. The bars are the compensation averages and the lines represent the standarderror of the mean for each bar.As figure 14 shows, from 2000 to 2010 the difference in potential compensationacross genders continued to shrink until 2010, when the potential compensation formales was not statistically different from that of females. Figure 13 depicts the realizedcompensation, showing that it is more disparate across genders than the potentialcompensation (particularly in the earlier part of the decade). Further research is neededto determine the underlying reasons for the difference. 5,000 4,500 5,000 4,000 4,500 3,500 4,000 3,000 3,500 2,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 2,000 1,500 1,500 1,000 1,000 500 500 0 0 5,000 5,000 4,500 4,500 4,000 4,000 3,500 3,500 3,000 3,000 2,500 2,500 2,000 2,000 1,500 1,500 1,000 1,000 500 500 0 0Figure 13: Total Realized Compensation(in thousands)Figure 13: TotalRealized Compensation(in 0620072007200820082009200920102010Figure 14: Total Potential CompensationFigure 14: TotalPotential Compensation(in thousands)(in 0620072007200820082009200920102010Drilling down into 2010 more closely (when the potential and realized compensations ofmales and females were not statistically different), we get a better understanding of whyFigurethis might be the case.Figure 15:15: RealizedRealized CompensationCompensation(in(in thousands)thousands) 5,000 5,000 4,500 4,500 4,000 4,00013

WomenWomenin 5,000Figure 14: Total Potential Compensation 4,500 4,000(in thousands)Leadership 5,000 3,500 4,500 3,000 4,000 2,500Female 3,500 2,000Male 3,000 1,500It 2,500turns out that there is a significant relation between gender and industry group, 1,000wherebyindustries in which women are more represented (with more than 10%Femalefemale 2,000 500executives)Male 1,500 0 show a different picture than the other industries. 1,0002000-0520062007200820092010 500 15 and 16 show the realized and potential compensation for each gender byFigures 0 group. Industries with more than 10% female executives had a higher realizedindustry2000-052006for their2007200820092010and potentialcompensationfemale executivesthantheir malecounterparts.What this may suggest is that as women gain more of a foothold within industries, theirFigure15: Realizedcompensation becomesmore favorablecomparedCompensationwith that of men.(in thousands) 5,000 4,500 4,000 5,000 3,500 4,500 3,000 4,000 2,500 3,500 2,000 3,000 1,500 2,500 1,000 2,000 500 1,500 1,000 500Figure 15: Realized Compensation(in thousands)FemaleMaleFemaleMaleBelow 5% FemaleBelow 5% Female 5,000 4,500 5,000 4,000 4,500 3,500 4,000 3,000 3,500 2,500 3,000 2,000 2,500 1,500 2,000 1,000 1,500 500 1,000 5005% to 10% FemaleAbove 10% FemaleAbove 10% FemaleFigure 16: 2010 Total Potential Compensation(in thousands)Figure 16: 2010 Total Potential Compensation(in thousands)FemaleMaleFemaleMaleBelow 5% FemaleBelow 5% Female145% to 10% Female5% to 10% Female5% to 10% FemaleAbove 10% FemaleAbove 10% Female

Figure 17: Female CEOs by RegionWomen as CEOs3.6%Women made up 2.4% of all S&P MidCap 400 CEOs from2006 to 2010. A look by3.9%0%Figure 17: Female CEOs by Region2.2%3.6%3.9%0%Figure 17: Female CEOs by Region103.6%3.9%Figure 18: Female CEOsby Industry Group2.2%80%642 CEOs during those years to beregion (figure 17) shows the percentage of women2.2%3.9% in the West, 3.6% in the Northeast, 2.2% in the South, and 0% in the Midwest.0Those industries withFiguremore womentend 5%to have 5-10%a higher percentageBelowAbove 10% of18: executivesFemalealsoCEOsfemale CEOs. As figures 1819 illustrate,female CEOs comprise 8.4% of CEOsbyandIndustryGroupin industries with more than 10% female executives; 2% in industries with 5% to 10%10Figure 19: Female Executives(including CEOs)Figure 18: Female CEOs8by IndustryGroup1015684642200Below 5%Non-CEOCEO1296Below 5%5-10%5-10%Above 10%30Above 10%Below 5%5-10%Above 10%female executives; and1.3% in industries with fewer than 5% female executives.Figure 19: FigureFemale Executives19: FemaleExecutivesFigure 20: Tenure for CEOs by Industry(includingCEOs)The study alsoanalyzed thetenure at the companybeforean executive became CEO, segmented(includingCEOs)15 industry. This tenure analysis is speculative, since only 47% of companies reported the CEO’sbyNon-CEO1510date of hire. Nonetheless, the data trend shows that in industrieswith more than 10% female MaleNon-CEOCEO12executives and in industries that have fewer than 5% female executives,companies tended toCEO128Female96963640215

WomenWomenin Leadershiphire female CEOs from the outside ratherthan promote them from within.630Below 5%5-10%Above 10%Figure 20: Tenure for CEOs by Industry10Figure 20 details this trend and showsMalethat for both the first block of industries8Female(with female representation in the topranks below 5%) and the last block6(with female representation in the top4ranks above 10%), the average tenure forwomen is negligible. This suggests that2CEOs are being hired from the outside.0Figure 20 also shows that for industriesBelow 5% 5-10% Above 10%with 5% to 10% female executives,companies tended to promote women from within. They promoted women after anaverage of 10 years and men after an average of 7 years.Reflections and Thoughts onthe FutureThe overall picture of women at the top level of mid-cap companies seems to be one ofoptimism in terms of compensation, but pessimism over their relative numbers. Thebrightest finding from this research is that the compensation gap, at least for women at thevery top levels of mid-cap organizations, appears to be closing. Although the gender gap incompensation was significant throughout most of the decade (with realized compensationdifferentials even greater), by 2010 the gap had closed. Moreover, in industries wherewomen represent more than 10% of the top executives, females are actually making slightlymore in overall pay than their male counterparts.However, the percentages of women who are actually represented in the top ranks of thesemid-sized companies are disappointing. There are only three industries where womenrepresent more than 10% of the top executive population.

its Center for Women in Business partnered with Georgetown University to examine women as business leaders. This includes research on small, medium, and large enterprises as well as women entrepreneurs. This research focuses on women’s participation in the top management ranks of the companies featured in the Standard & Poor