The Historic Vote in Scotland
September 22, 2014 --
Last Thursday Scotland was the site of an historic vote with implications around the world. We speak, of course, of the ballot by the currently all-male members of the Royal and Ancient Golf Club on whether the club should begin admitting women. A resounding 85 percent of the members voted that it should be so, and thus swept away the Club’s men-only policy that had existed for 260 years. (Until about 20 years ago, a sign just outside the clubhouse read, “No Dogs or Women Allowed.”)
The Royal and Ancient Golf Club is not your average duffers’ club. It sits behind the first tee of the Old Course at St. Andrews, widely regarded as the cradle of the game and also as one of the world’s most beautiful courses. Its governing body helps adjudicate the rules of the game everywhere. Its decision to admit women members declares to the world of golf that sex discrimination is now out of bounds.
This matters because although women today are faring better in the workplace than in the past, they still confront sizable underrepresentation in key leadership positions in business and beyond. Consider this recent study of women in corporate C-suites and boardrooms. The number of female Fortune 500 CEOs? 23, or 4.6 percent. The number of female Fortune 500 C-level officers? About 15 percent—with zero at 135 of these companies. The number of female U.S. senators? 20. So it goes around the world. Climb the ladder of professional success and there are fewer women.
There are a number of reasons why women are underrepresented. One is that current leaders often nurture younger men more than younger women. In one fascinating yet sobering randomized, double-blind study, application letters and resumes for lab-manager positions were sent to leading scientists at six top research universities. The applications were identical except for the candidates’ first names: half were John, half were Jennifer. The results? “Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the female applicant”—so much so that the average starting salary offered to the male applicant was about 15 percent higher than that offered to the female applicant. And, in some ways most shocking of all, female faculty were just as likely as their male counterparts to exhibit bias against the female applicant.
But another source of women underrepresentation in leadership has been overt discrimination in seats of power, such as the Royal and Ancient Golf Club. Last week’s wise vote by club members tears down that barrier in one such seat—with hopefully other such clubs following suit soon. In a world where economic growth remains too slow, the costs of gender discrimination extend beyond women themselves to broader society in terms of foregone jobs and innovation. After Thursday’s vote, such gains may soon come to the well-respected University of St. Andrews. Although founded in 1413, only in 2009 did it name its first female president, Louise Richardson, who commented that her exclusion from the Club has been a “workplace hurdle.”
Oh, and by the way, there was one other vote in Scotland last Thursday: a national referendum on whether to secede from the United Kingdom. In response to the simple question, “Should Scotland be an independent country?” 55.3 percent voted “no.” Thus was the United Kingdom preserved. Had the Scots voted to secede, a host of thorny economic and financial questions would have arisen. What currency would Scotland use? How would existing U.K. debt be apportioned to Scotland? How would Scotland establish fiscal credibility?
The world economy needs faster growth founded on opportunity for all—especially for women, who for far too long, in far too many places, have faced discrimination and worse. In this spirit, there was an historic vote cast in Scotland last week—just not the one anyone expected.
Articles © 2014 Matthew Slaughter and Matthew Rees. All rights reserved.
Publication © 2014 Trustees of Dartmouth College. All rights reserved.