I'm reading Bain & Company's "The Great Disappearing Act: Gender Parity Up The Corporate Ladder" and listening to the continuing "gender agenda" debate from Davos. Lots of food for thought this Tuesday morning.

First observation - the gender agenda at Davos was scheduled for early on a Saturday morning. Did this discussion get the prime time slot and focus it deserves?

Second observation - we're still "talking" about advancement of women. I don't know about you, but I'm tired of "making the business case" and the lip-service paid to this issue.

Here is the ultimate question Bain & Company (in association with Harvard Business Review) looked to answer in a recent global survey: "What prevents organizations from retaining their best female talent and promoting them to top management roles?". According to Bain, this recent survey attracted more than 1,800 respondents, with nearly 60 percent in senior management or executive positions. Their survey results are interesting, not surprising and a bit, well, depressing! Both men (91%) and women (82%) aspire to be senior leaders in their organization, however, fewer women reach that rung in the corporate ladder. Guess what! 66% of the men report that they believe women share equal opportunity to be promoted to leadership and governance positions, however, less than a third of the women feel the same. And get this - as for the importance of parity in the workplace and whether it should be a business imperative, women vote strongly in favor of the strategic commitment by their organization (80%). Here's the kicker! Only 48% of the men in the Bain survey feel that achieving gender parity should be a critical business imperative for their organizations!!!

What are the BIG issues:
* Perception: that opportunities exist equally for men and women, that existing policies are working & that by increasing the pipeline of talent, companies will reach the goal of gender parity at the top!
* Women are taking their talent elsewhere! In the Bain survey, they note that 1600 new businesses a day are started by women entrepreneurs, more than 2x the rate of other businesses. Great for the women, great for the economy but if gender parity improves profitability, why aren't big companies in a panic over the loss of this talent!

Will corporations ever change their DNA so gender parity in the C-suite or around the boardroom table is achieved? Are quotas the answer or goals or compensation incentives? If money (salary, bonus, compensation) often is determinative of career paths and choices for professionals, does it even matter what the corporate policies are? If gender parity is "good for business" - if your business environment and interactions is in a rich, diverse world (the clients, NGOs, media, potential talent), what's the problem? If parity increases profits/improves the bottom line, where's the shareholder activism? Isn't it time to shift away from an up & out model for corporate advancement to an "up & stay around" talent retention environment?

The survey results, as well as the debate at Davos, raises questions, really good questions, but "The Answer", the solution to this particular strategic imperative, still eludes us.

**********
WSJ Article on the Bain Survey: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704094304575029201692700496.html#mod=todays_us_personal_journal