Women Executives in Canada 2012
Every December for the last 10 years, the Women’s Executive Network (WXN) has chosen to honour 100 of Canada’s most powerful professional women in the private, public and not-for-profit sectors. In December 2012, they noted that notwithstanding these high achievers, women are not fully represented in board rooms and the C-suite across the country. ( http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/05/most-powerful-women-in-canada_n_2238508.html )
In terms of Canada’s hospitals, picking 50 at random out of the 240 listed, http://www.cbc.ca/news/health/features/ratemyhospital/hospitalratings.html,
30% of the CEOs were female. Looking at org charts, many women were in positions of influence in C-Suites in healthcare across the country, apart from the CEOs.
However, an article published in March 2013 quoting a TD Economics article, http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2013/03/08/business-women-boards.html disclosed that Canada was falling behind with respect to women on corporate boards in general. The article noted that “women represent just 11 per cent of board members on companies listed on the S&P/TSX composite index, which represents large publicly traded Canadian companies”. Similarly a survey by GMI Ratings, put the percentage of female board members at 13.1 per cent. They actually called for gender diversity policies to be put in place when it comes to choosing new board members. Also mention was made of “Notable female CEOs in Canada including Linda Hasenfratz, head of auto parts manufacturer Linamar, Christine Day, CEO of Lululemon Athletica (who has since resigned), and Heather Reisman, CEO of Indigo Books & Music.”
In August 2011, the Conference Board of Canada issued a report entitled “Women in Senior Management: Where Are They?”( http://www.conferenceboard.ca/e-library/abstract.aspx?did=4416). They found that women were missing in action and suggested 3 possibilities –the glass ceiling, gender stereotyping, and organizational culture and gender harassment.
Perhaps similar facts compelled Cheryl Sandberg to write her new book “Lean In”, where Ms. Sandberg urges women to put in the effort to get to the top. This is the first truly successful, best-selling “how to succeed in business” motivational book to be explicitly designed and marketed for women (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/jun/06/sheryl-sandberg-how-succeed-business/ ) and (http://220.127.116.11/~hessjobs to order the book). Lean In’s goal is to push women forward into their work so as to overcome what Sandberg represents as women’s universal internal resistance to career velocity.
Whether it is an external or internal obstacle course, women will endeavour, move forward, and succeed – if they want to. But the obstacles are truly there – like pay discrimination, at times inadequate family leave time, burden of caring for 2 generations, responsibilities at home, the human desire for motherhood and caring for children, and many more.
An actual look at the list of Canada’s most powerful women will nevertheless truly be a heartening experience ( http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/05/most-powerful-women-in-canada_n_2238508.html ).
If a stranger came up to you and asked for your phone number, address, email address, birthday, credit card numbers, SINs, or SSNs, passwords, and similar information on all of your family and friends, you would be horrified, tempted to call the police, and would rush away as quickly as possible.
Yet, I repeat, yet, online, you are quite happy and most likely to provide that information willingly, in return, perhaps, for one chance in 10 million of winning a car,
a trip, a free movie, a free meal, a book, you get the idea.
At least the stranger showed you his face – online there are billions of faceless faces listening and watching and gathering data. Is not the unknown scary? What happened to the monster in the clothes cupboard or under the bed, that we all knew and feared as kids? Perhaps we were right. Prescient even.
Who are these monsters? Let’s see – Twitter, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, ISPs, telecoms, smartphones, PCs, tablets, banks, insurance companies, retailers, food stores, and more, all of which gather and store unimaginable amounts of personal data and associated other information (known as metadata). This data is salable, attractive, in great demand by the NSA, governments, hackers, big business, onliners, and others.
A report in the Washington Post on July 31, 2013 quoted Twitter as saying that “the US government continues to make the most requests for information about the social network’s subscribers”. Why not – it is not illegal. Also, disturbingly, Twitter was actually hacked in February 2013, with hackers gaining access to information on over 250,000 users (Toronto Star, Feb. 2, 2013). Twitter also mentioned at the time that other companies and organizations were similarly attacked, despite all well-intentioned assurances of security.
Ann Cavoukian, Ontario’s information and privacy commissioner, published “A Primer on Metadata: Separating Fact from Fiction” (http://www. ipc.on.ca). She contends that hiding behind the innocent word ‘metadata’ is the way surveillance programs try to downplay the serious implications of the use of this data for digital profiling and invasion of privacy. Again, there are not really any legal restrictions on all of this – we humans created this magic so quickly that we can barely deal with the implications.
This has also led some to question as to who should govern internet privacy. Michael Geist, Toronto Star, July 27, 2013, has brought forward the worry that an internet which became the web which became a surveillance source, may not be safe in the hands of ICANN (an innocent body set up and governed by the US), and that in fact, countries may want to govern their own internet space. This would be a sad outcome indeed, isolationist, the beloved net no longer able to be called the amazing World Wide Web, taken over by greed and big government.
How to get around some of this? Pay cash, forget about telling everyone on Facebook what you had for dinner, who all your relatives are, what you look like, what your newborn baby looks like, and don’t lose your smartphone! Also, apparently there are so called safe search engines such as DuckDuckGo and Ixquick which promise that they do not collect data (Oskar Garcia, Toronto Star, July 27, 2013).
Some of this, not all, as you may not be able to get around having home and car insurance, paying taxes, buying a car, seeing a doctor, filling prescriptions, owning a phone. One news report showed a high security division of an unnamed country going back to good old Underwoods, Royals, and carbon paper.
And remember that the monster in the cupboard and under the bed is there, and wants your data, and wants to sell it to every other monster.