[https://peoplesphere.be/nl/quotawet-werkt-vier-keer-meer-vrouwen-raden-bestuur/](https://peoplesphere.be/nl/quotawet-werkt-vier-keer-meer-vrouwen-raden-bestuur/)

The binding approach of the Quota Act works: the number of women on boards of directors has quadrupled between 2008 and 2020, according to research by the Institute for the equality of women and men. The contrast is stark with the executive committees, where the Quota Act does not apply: women make up only 14.8% of the members. The Council of the European Union expressed its support for the ‘Women on board’ directive, which aims to strengthen the participation of women in the management of companies.

The Institute’s analysis is based on the composition of boards of directors and management committees for the year 2020. It shows that the number of women on the boards of directors of private and public companies as a whole has quadrupled between 2008 and 2020, from 8 .3% in 2008 to 34.1%. Even better: in 2020, 98.2% of companies complied with the Quota Act.

*“This is a very encouraging result. Numerous studies show that gender diversity in decision-making bodies has a positive effect on company performance and governance. The evolution of the figures regarding the representation of women on the boards of directors shows that most companies have turned gender diversity into a lever for their development,”* says deputy director Liesbet Stevens.

It is striking that only 5.6% of the companies had a woman at the head of their board of directors.

***The executive committees***

The situation is completely different for the executive committees. Since they are not subject to the law, they are not obliged to achieve gender diversity results. As a result, the representation of women remains at a very low level: 14.5% in 2017 against 14.8% in 2020.

However, a more detailed reading of the figures shows that trends are increasingly diverging between autonomous public companies on the one hand and listed private companies on the other. In public companies, the percentage of female board members increased from 18.4% in 2017 to 30% in 2020. In private companies, the percentage of women fell from 14.2% to 13.9% over the same period.

Finally, only 4.5% of CEOs were women in 2020. According to Liesbet Stevens, *“It is time to evolve the legislation to remove certain obstacles, especially at the level of the executive committees. Quotas are not a measure that people like to take, but they do allow us to act quickly in a situation of great inequality”.*

***The ‘Women On Board’ guideline***

This draft directive, dating from 2012, has recently received a major boost from the French Presidency. Today at the EPSCO Council meeting in Luxembourg, Member States expressed their support for the final compromise. It provides for two possibilities: either a quota of 40% is set in the board of directors of listed private and public companies, or a quota of 33% is set among the members of the board of directors and the executive committee.

Next steps: approval by the European Parliament in September. Subsequently, Member States will start transposing it into their national legislation.

Secretary of State Sarah Schlitz added: “*The Institute’s figures once again demonstrate the effectiveness of the quotas. Ten years ago, Belgium took the right direction towards greater equality between women and men, and today we are at the top of the European class. The figures show that we must now focus our efforts on the feminisation of the executive committees. This directive is a good opportunity to move forward in that direction.”*

*Source : Institute for the equality of women and men*

6 comments

  2. So, companies were required to place women in boards, and now there are women in boards. This isn’t “the quota’s are working”, but just “companies adhere to regulations”.

    It’s the result of more women in boards that should be inspected. According to most studies, companies that had more inclusive boards, performed noticeably better. So instead of “hah we forced more women on boards!”, they should headline “companies with more women on their board, do better!”.

  3. To be honest, if I’m not mistaken, that was how it worked in politics:

    – No quota at all: Lots of men
    – Require parties to put 50% of women on list: They abide, put them in non electable positions: Still a lot of men
    – Require parties to alternate gender on the lists: Still mostly men at the top of the list, but got much more women elected

    I’d like the idea that we should not *need* quotas (that should happen by itself) – but history is a good “proof” that we do need them until it’s so normal for everyone that maybe we’ll be able to remove them.

  4. I get that sometimes these things are needed, but I always wonder why they are applied so specifically.

    Why isn’t there a quota for men on teachers? Daycare workers? Nurses?
    Why isn’t there a quote for women in construction? Truck drivers? Port officials? (Or is there?)

    I mean, if these things are so effective why not roll them out for some other pretty ‘insert sex’-dominated jobs?

  5. One should also look at the output of these companies.

    If you make a quotum to bring more chocolate figurines on the board, and then you report that there are more chocolate figurines on your board… it is a pretty useless fact if your board is no longer functional due to the amount of chocolate figurines.

    ​

    I am not comparing women to chocolate figurines. Nor am I insinuating boards are running more efficient or less efficient with more or less women in there. I am just simply stating that this is should be the research question. Not wheter women are there, but wheter it is beneficial to companies to put quota there or not.

Leave a Reply