Ground Floor: International Women's Day this week was a "celebration of economic, social, cultural and political achievements for women".
I always feel that there's more emphasis placed on women's social, cultural and political achievements rather than their economic or business ventures, particularly on the world stage.
We don't hear enough about the achievements of women in business or manufacturing: how many people know that Josephine Garis Cochran invented the first working automatic dishwasher, shown at the 1893 World Fair in Chicago; or that Mary Anderson was granted the first patent for a windshield wiper in 1903; or that, in 1917, Charlotte Bridgwood was the president of the Bridgwood Manufacturing Co?
Last October, Fortune magazine published its list of its 50 most powerful women in business. For the first time in a number of years the list wasn't headed by the now-departed chief executive of Hewlett-Packard (HP), Carly Fiorina, but instead by eBay chief executive Meg Whitman.
Fortune pointed out that, with a $60 billion (€44.9 billion) market value, eBay had powered past HP in the business stakes and that, based on its selection criteria, Fiorina was no longer the force that she'd once been (although at that point she was only bumped down to number two, not yet having had to pack her bags for promising more than she delivered).
Fortune ranked the women on the size and importance of their business in a global market, their clout inside the company, their career trajectory and their social and cultural impact.
Following along behind Whitman and Fiorina came Andrea Jung, chairwoman and chief executive of Avon; Anne Mulcahy, chairwoman and chief executive of Xerox; and Marjorie Magner, chairwoman and chief executive of the Citigroup Global Consumer Group. (Magner also tops the list of most powerful women in banking.)
Outside the US, the international list of most powerful women included Anne Lauvergeon, chairperson of French nuclear power and IT company Areva; Xie Qihua, chairwoman and president of the Shanghai Baosteel group; and Marjorie Scardino, chief executive of media group Pearson.
These are as diverse a group of successful women as you could hope to meet. Whitman is described as an enabler, helping people to get things done.
Jung believes that women's reluctance to network in the same way as their male counterparts is a weakness in a corporate landscape sculpted by male values. She says that women don't support each other as well as they should and sometimes wait for someone to take them under their wing.
According to Jung, "they shouldn't wait. They should find someone's wings to grab onto."
Magner has been with Citigroup for more than 20 years and is described as a natural motivator. The Global Consumer Group has increased its contribution to the profitability of the group from $4.5 billion in 2003 to $9.6 billion last year. Magner is responsible for 150,000 staff in 54 countries and 120 million customers.
Mulcahy has often been seen as being in the shadow of Fiorina (mainly because she's not dissimilar in appearance). Like Magner, she's been at her company for more than two decades and is very conscious of corporate cultures. In knowing that Xerox had to change, her view was that it was impossible to completely turn a culture around but that it was necessary to find its weaknesses and deal with them. (In the case of Xerox it was a rationalisation programme - Mulcahy might have a soft approach but that doesn't mean she's not able to downsize a company.)
Lauvergeon and Qihua have exceptional backgrounds in engineering while Scardino's publishing empire includes the Financial Times and the Economist.
The highest ranked newcomer on the list was Zoë Cruz, head of fixed income at Morgan Stanley. Known as Cruz missile around the office for her ability to set goals and move unswervingly towards her target, she pulled in a salary plus bonus package of $16.1 million last year - out-earning chief executive Philip Purcell who took home a mere $15 million.
According to Cruz, women "are only going to continue in the game if the trade off is worth it". I guess $16.1 million makes it worth it.
All of the women I mention would pull out their hair in horror at the thought of their gender being an issue in their careers. Many of them have been with their companies for more than 10 years, which perhaps lends weight to the argument that women take a longer-term view than their male counterparts.
Forbes ran a poll on what was the most influential career that a woman could choose. Topping the poll was chief executive of a major corporation, with 19 per cent of the vote. Supreme court justice was next with 17 per cent, followed by president of a mid-sized nation at 16 per cent and TV personality at 15 per cent. At the bottom of the scale was queen of a mid-sized nation, wife of a G8 leader and best-selling author - all on 4 per cent.
Maybe if I'd stuck with the bond trading and the business world I could have been pulling in the big bucks and maybe even made it as the chief executive of a major company by now.
All of the women in the Fortune Top Five are around my own age, which makes me feel like a hopeless slacker.
Having turned to creative writing, I'm now languishing at the 4 per cent level of importance without the million-dollar income!
Maybe women don't celebrate the success of other women enough because it makes us feel inadequate ourselves. Nevertheless, being happy with your chosen path - whether it's at the boardroom of a major company or being chief executive of the family home or - combining both - is the most successful thing of all.
www.sheilaoflanagan.net
