Thank you, Juanita.
Ms Junie Foo
Chair of BoardAgender
Dr Ann Tan
Chair of Women’s Register
Dr Marleen Dieleman
Associate Director, NUS Centre for Governance, Institutions and Organizations (CGIO)
Mrs Laura Hwang
President of the Singapore Council of Women’s Organisations
Distinguished Guests
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Good afternoon.
I am honoured to be here today to launch the Singapore Board Gender Diversity Report. This groundbreaking research details the extent of gender diversity in the boardrooms of companies listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange (SGX).
BoardAgender
This report is a joint collaboration between BoardAgender and the NUS Centre for Governance, Institutions and Organizations (CGIO). This report combines the research strengths of NUS and the focus and reach of BoardAgender.
In March this year, my Ministry supported the launch of BoardAgender by the Singapore Council of Women’s Organisations (SCWO). BoardAgender, along with the Women’s Register, are SCWO’s outreach arms. The Women’s Register supports younger women through networking and mentoring. BoardAgender is more focused. It is a networking platform for senior-level women and promotes gender diversity at top management levels.
Within seven months, BoardAgender has held several events and dialogue sessions with over 30 companies, both local and multi-national, based in Singapore. They are also more than halfway to their target of recruiting 100 BoardAgender Champions. These Champions, men and women, are industry leaders, CEOs and prominent figures from the private, public and people sectors, all pledging to support gender diversity.
Board Gender Diversity
The Singapore Gender Board Diversity Report provides a frank and open assessment of the situation in Singapore. It shows that in 2010, only 6.9% of our SGX listed companies have women on their boards. This figure is dismal, compared to the situation in other countries. Norway has the highest rate of women represented on their boards – about 40%. In Sweden, 27.5% of their directors are women and, in Finland, almost 24.5% are women. Some Asian countries have done better than Singapore. In Hong Kong, 8.6% of the board directors are women, and in China the figure is 8.1%. Even Malaysia, at 7.8%, has done better than Singapore.
Our women have achieved much progress in education and at work. Yet they continue to face obstacles in rising to the top leadership positions in the corporate world. I wish to stress that this is not just a numbers game. Rather, it is about ensuring that our leadership in all sectors reflect the diversity of our society. It is about recognizing that women can bring different skills, perspectives and experience to the boardroom. It is about ensuring that decisions made in the Boardroom reflect the realities that we live in. It is about making more rounded, holistic and balanced decisions.
If there are really good reasons, such as a scarcity of qualified, capable women, I will not be too worried about the absence of women on company boards. But we know that this is not the case.
We also know that globally boardroom gender diversity is increasingly being recognised as a key factor for greater effectiveness and higher governance standards. In a McKinsey survey, as far back as 2007, companies with a higher proportion of women on their management committees are 47% more profitable. Since then other researches have echoed these findings.
A series of reports by Catalyst1 on Fortune 500 companies showed that those with gender diversity on their boards and managed it well, experienced higher financial performance on average.
We also know that women make many important decisions like what we eat, wear and use at home. This is supported by a study by Mastercard which stressed that in the Asia-Pacific, women are the ones influencing 64% of the household buying decisions and therefore exerting great impact on businesses. All these years, I have never seen a single advertisement selling household products, such as detergents, where men are used as models. It is always the picture of a woman extolling the virtures of a particular detergent because she is the one that buys and uses it at home.
Yet, we continue to have this gap. I urge companies to accord higher priority to gender diversity on their boards. This requires much effort. It will require companies to put in place structures to systematically identify and place women on their boards.
Going Forward
We could look at this issue in three ways. We can continue to maintain the status quo and do nothing about it, which many of you will agree with me is not tenable. Another alternative is through legislation, the route taken by some countries like Norway, Spain, and France. The Netherlands is working on such legislation.
Another option could be through having quotas or targets as Malaysia has done. The EU parliament has called for EU-wide legislation stipulating at least 40% of seats on listed companies’ supervisory boards to be reserved for women by 2020. Although not obligatory, it indicates a growing momentum.
The other route is through education and persuasion, the path that we have taken as we recognize that the legislative route is not necessarily the best option. Also, the legislative route seems to be in its early years. We need to monitor and assess their effectiveness before jumping in. Women that I spoke to have also expressed reservations, as they want to be appointed on their own merits, not because of some quota.
We tried this approach in the voluntary sector. One initiative that the government had supported is the “Board Match” managed by the Centre for Non-Profit Leadership, as appointed by the National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre. The “Board Match”, is an initiative to build capacities in the non-profit sector. We do this by matching skilled senior-level individuals to the boards of non-profit organizations in Singapore. Since its inception, Board Match has been incredibly successful – placing more than 33%2 women versus men to board positions on NGOs.
This win-win formula enables non-profit organizations to tap on the pool of capable persons for board appointments. It has also opened up avenues for committed and talented women to gain board-level experience.
We need more such initiatives. We need good role models. The 100 Champions of BoardAgender are good examples. I also believe that GLCs and TLCs can take the lead and support the appointment of more women to their boards. Perhaps the Corporate Governance Council could also consider advising or encouraging SGX-listed companies to be more gender-balanced. This would help raise awareness amongst listed companies to take into consideration gender diversity when forming their Boards.
Conclusion
In conclusion, let me take this opportunity to applaud BoardAgender for its significant efforts in encouraging public discussion on gender diversity in the boardrooms.
We need such concerted actions to engender a mindset change. With consistent and persistent reminders, I believe it will gradually but surely become second nature for boards to consciously seek out women candidates instead of “recycling” members from the same network.
I remain hopeful that change will come.