Gender Gap in Supply Chain Leadership?

I read a blog the other day by a smart lady named Sarah Lim. It was called "Take the Lead in Fairness". She commented on women in procurement and the lack thereof in the top ranks. She implied a lack of opportunity due to gender bias, and a failure by Corporate America to "keep pace with the changing needs of modern day living". The implication of her point was that most workplaces are not flexible enough to meet the needs of working women, mothers in particular.

She goes on with a list of recommendations for a more flexible workplace, most of which I wholeheartedly agree with, though most of these are not really gender specific. She then implies that somehow if we resolved these workplace issues, we would achieve gender parity in the executive suite. Well… maybe not.

Certainly my experience will support the idea of gender bias in Corporate America. I agree as well that this issue is not as severe as when I started in the workplace, but it is still there for sure. Over the years, I have come to count on finding a group of talented hard working women operating significantly below their talent and earning potential at each new job I have accepted. I have yet to be disappointed.

Given the opportunity, I have found these women were able to move into positions of far greater responsibility (and pay), and achieve great results for the company, and themselves. These women were invariably very hard workers and would readily go above and beyond the call of duty at a moment's notice. Many of my management teams ended up with gender parity earlier than the statistical norm.

I did learn that accommodations had to be made. Yes, these women did take more time off than their male counterparts. A lot of this time was unscheduled as well. I also noticed occasionally, their children occupying their office or cube when child care issues came up. As I tacitly allowed for these, I also noticed them, back in the day, carrying reports home with them, and later, emails at all hours. In nearly every case, I got at least as much as I needed from these women and many times, more than I expected. I learned that, right or wrong, these women were carrying a bigger or at least different burden than their male counterparts, and had different demands on their time. However, if given flexibility, they could produce at least as much

This experience caused me to rethink a lot of my methods. I learned to define and measure job performance by specific deliverables and results, assigning work by ownership of a specific function or process rather than by hours worked or other more conventional measures. I found that these changes were not really an accommodation, but actually a more effective way of getting the job done. This has become even more true as the procurement function really goes global, requiring communication nearly 24/7. If I am on the phone with Asia from 8 to 10 PM, why do I need to be in the office from 8 to 10 AM? This also served me well later when I began to manage people remotely or who worked from home

OK, so why did I say "Maybe not" about these changes affecting the top echelon positions?

In the end the organization is a pyramid. There are a whole lot of lower positions and only a handful of top ones. This means competition, and very tough competition. The folks who win those slots are those willing to do whatever it takes to get them. That includes a near singular focus on the job and that precludes the sort of "flexibility" discussed above. You went to your kid's soccer game and someone else did not. She gets an opportunity you missed. Most really successful women I know who have made it to the higher ranks in procurement, are either single or have a partner who handles a lot of the details of the household, allowing for the sort of focus required.

This may not be fair or pleasant, but until we do away with hierarchical organizations or promotion decisions based on competitive performance, folks who chose for work life balance will lose. As more women than men tend to take this route, I believe that parity is a long way off…

 

So Who Cares About Supply Chain?

Well, nobody really, and why should they? I was in an online discussion group recently (that is where I get a lot of my ideas for blog posts) and our group members were discussing how our chosen career seems only to get press when things go wrong. Save money? That's expected. Everything get here on time? Expected. Miss that shipment? Now we get attention!

So as managers, how do we insure that our group gets the recognition it deserves? This is not just a question of morale. When resources are allocated (or eliminated) the company needs to understand our value add. Supply chain also needs a seat at the table when key decisions are made, as we really can have a big effect on cost and customer satisfaction. Let's look at how to do that.

Step 1: Get out much?

I am a self confessed supply chain/logistics nerd. I love to look at the latest data, understanding what fuel surcharges are doing to cost per kilo out of Bangkok, how many PO lines were placed last week per buyer, looking at the S&OP data. Being on top of that data makes for better decisions for sure. (or maybe it means I need to get a life).

I dont kid myself though. This information, even a great improvement on one metric or another, is only mildly interesting to my peers or my boss. My monthly review may have all my personal hot button issues, and I may have automated that report so that it automatically gets sent to my Blackberry at 12:00 midnight on the 1^st. If my boss and peers don't need that information, I might just want to keep that to myself.

So we need to get out. We need to insure that we understand 2 key things.

One is that we "get" all of my business unit's goal's, objectives and metrics. The key is that all of my reporting needs to be put into terms that show how what I am doing affects our success as a group. This is not just numbers. What are your strategic goals? What is your boss getting pushed about right now?

Two is to spend time with our customers. Find out what your competitive issues are. Take a salesman to lunch. You will be surprised at what you find out. Find out the things your internal customers are struggling with. It is information? Cycle time?

Make sure every one of your staff understands these issues as well and know this is why they show up every day.

Step 2: Get Relevant

Is cash an area of focus? Then I need to be able to talk about what I am doing for inventory reductions. Is the group trying to break into a specific account? Show how your new 3PL contract can save money on their shipping lanes. Let's face it, we are here to add value, and that value is in how well we support the team. Let's make sure we do that.

Any projects or programs you start or work should be based upon these issues and presented as such to your group. Once you are "aligned", your routine reports will be your best sales tool. It will be easy to garner attention from your customers and management, because you will be talking about things they care about, and if you are good, you will be able to show progress in support of their goals.

Focus on cost, quality and efficiency is good, but it is also expected. Show your group as a key part of the solution to meet the company's goals and objectives. You will be looked upon as a key player, because you will be one. People want to support you if they think you are there to support them.

 

Its easy