Don't quota me...

Theresa May - A positive...and a negative...
does that make her neutral?
Image via Wikipedia

This week we had the pleasure of welcoming a guest speaker from the organisation 'Chwarae Teg' or 'Fair Play' to Swansea Business School for a session on gender equality (or inequality) in business.  Chwarae Teg is an organisation that supports the economic development of women here in Wales, and I can imagine that those of you who are regular readers of this blogs will probably be able to predict that the very fact that this organisation exists annoys the hell out of me...

It probably annoys the hell out of them too.

I hope it does.

Our speaker, Ellie Harwood, was excellent; knowledgeable and balanced, with some excruciating examples of ignorance to share, and I was thoroughly impressed with way Chwarae Teg go about what they do, but I can't help feeling sad that they are seen as necessary.

This session was timely, as you may have seen in the news this week the reporting of the results of the Davies Review of women on boards.  Of course, one might find it ironic that a middle-aged, upper-classed, white male was asked to undertake the review...but one can only assume he was the best candidate for the job...is that right Dave?

As an aside...I find it hilarious that throughout the report Lord Davies himself refers to 'Chairmen' as the people who have to solve the problems.  Old habits run deep eh?

To add to the general farcical nature of the whole review, Theresa May gave a rather confused speech at the launch, which for me, highlighted many of the complexities here.  On her own behalf she championed the cause against so-called positive action, saying she didn't want to to be done any favours because of her gender and wanted to make it on her own merits, but at the same time she was supporting the recommendations of the report which, although it does not directly recommend government sponsored positive discrimination, simply seems to pass the buck to businesses (over to you Chairmen!) by recommending target levels that ought to be achieved.  I have two words on this - cop out.

Another disappointment in the reporting of the results of the review was the BBC's choice to angle the story on the (undisputable but deeply misleading fact) that the number of women on boards is at unprecedented levels.  I have to say I feel this is rather lazy journalism...of course any tiny increase is going to result in 'unprecedented levels', but this is not the story here.  The story is that there's inequality and nobody is dealing with the root causes.

So what is the root cause?  Simple. The issue we all know is there already, and the thing that our speaker from Chwarae Teg highlighted so eloquently this week.  Endemic enculturation and acculturation of gender stereotyping from a very early age.  Education is where we need to start...and not just the education of our children, but education throughout life.  Chwarae Teg are about to start piloting programmes in schools to break down gender stereotyping from a very early age, and I think this is excellent, but we need to do more...and those of us involved in education at University level or in organisational training and development have a role to play here too. But it's not simply about a half day training course on why we're all equal...it's about a culture change...and for that we need role models.  We don't, however, need to parachute these role models onto boards to meet false quotas...we simply have to start with ourselves.  Whether you're a man or a woman you can be a role model on this, just by thinking about the language you use and reflecting on the way you treat people in your workplace.

So, please don't quota me or any other woman onto a board - don't insult me by patronising me in this way.  Just appoint me on the basis of my ability to do a fantastic job, or don't appointment me at all.

My column in the business section of the South Wales Evening Post also addresses this issue this month (out Monday if you're interested) :)

Celebrity Tweets and Fake Reviews - Further Proof that we need Higher Education to Foster Critical Thinking Skills

Rio Ferdinand, recently involved in 'Sponsored Tweets' debate. Image via Wikipedia

Last week a chocolate bar maker was heavily criticised for sponsoring celebrities including Rio Ferdinand, Katie Price and Cher Lloyd to post Tweets which were part of a campaign to promote their products.  The BBC's Rory Cellan-Jones raised concerns via his blog, citing the recent ruling on the activities of 'Handpicked Media' by the Office of Fair Trading that ' "consumers should understand when they are reading paid-for promotional content"(OFT, 2010).

Add to this today's news that the online travel advice company Tripadvisor - one of the pioneers of Internet business models based on User-Generated-Content (UGC) - has been criticised by the Advertising Standards Authority for using marketing copy that suggested that reviews were genuine and 'concluded that the claims were misleading' (ASA, 2012), and by recent criticism of Amazon's policy regarding rewards for customers for positive reviews (Time, 2012; New York Times, 2012).

Not only does this raise ethical and  legal questions, but it also has broad implications for businesses, consumers and, I would suggest, for educators too.  The  problem could be tackled in a number of ways.  Industry regulation (as provided by the ASA) and government intervention are, of course, important to consider, but so are the issues of the ethical responsibilities of marketers and our abilities as consumers to determine the validity of the messages we are presented with.

This, for me, is further proof that we need the skills developed through Higher Education more than ever.  Final year undergraduate students and postgraduate students across the country will be only too familiar with the phrase 'critical analysis and evaluation' - this is one of the key abilities we seek to develop in our students, and it is a crucial life skill for understanding and surviving in a consumer society.  We need to make sure students can tell the difference between fakes and the real thing, we need them to be able to make sound judgements based on the evidence they have and to have an understanding of their own biases and those of others.  The link between these thinking skills and our ability to decode and understand the marketing messages we receive is important, and in the context of the latest figures from UCAS showing that applications to Higher Education are down 7.4% so far in this recruitment cycle (UCAS, 2012), (although these figures need to be contextualised - or critically analysed if you prefer!), it is worrying that we may find ourselves with fewer people who have highly developed critical thinking skills.

There is no quick solution here (without a damaging knee jerk), and I do believe we need to consider putting in place the policy and regulatory environments that encourage businesses to tackle these issues - without censorship - but don't forget that we as consumers should also be able to make sound judgements about our purchases, and have the freedom share our views with others.

This is where Higher Education can help...

Chocolate Oranges - a Nudge, a Tap, and a Policy Unwrapped...

Terry's Chocolate Orange - tapped and unwrapped
Image by VerseVend via Flickr

Ah, what a gift to political rhetoric the Chocolate Orange is.  In a 2006 speech whilst leader of the opposition, David Cameron criticised 'irresponsible' marketers for placing special offers on chocolate next to tills in retail stores, highlighting the ironic unhealthy/healthy name of the Chocolate Orange and saying '"As Britain faces an obesity crisis, why does WH Smith's promote half-price Chocolate Oranges at its checkouts instead of real oranges?"(BBC, 2006).  Which party does he belong to again?

Well, this week the chocolate orange has reared its tempting, medusa-like head once again, with Ed Miliband dredging up this as an example of Cameron's failure to deliver on the promises made in opposition, telling 'The House' Magazine "If he can't sort out the chocolate orange, he's not going to sort out the train companies, the energy companies, the banks, is he?" (The House, 2012).

Terry's must be wondering what on earth is going on.  They've had quite a year of bizarre and perhaps somewhat unexpected publicity as it happens.  One of their flagship products and a staple in the Christmas stockings for many of us, the Chocolate Orange experienced something of a sales spike last autumn when a 'glitch' in Tesco's computer systems meant they could be bought for just 29p.  A buying frenzy ensued, with happy shoppers posting photographs of them posing with their 'Orange Art' in the form of giant pyramids of the boxed chocs (Huffington Post, 2011).

So, is all this publicity good or bad for the Chocolate Orange?  Well it depends where you stand on the 'all publicity is good publicity' debate.  My view is that anything that gets an old product in the news, particularly an old favourite, is going to have a 'Nudge' effect on sales (although you do have to get your pricing right of course...).  The irony is that a reliance on Nudge politics is exactly what Ed Miliband is criticising David Cameron for: "You know he believes in a nudge philosophy which seems to amount to just asking people to do nice things. But that isn't going to sort out the problem. You've got to change the rules" (BBC, 2012). 

Nudges work in marketing because they remind us of things we like (Barnard and Ehrenberg, 1997).  It's pretty simple isn't it? Reminding us of pleasure makes us more likely to seek it, whereas reminding us of pain and responsibility makes us want to...well...eat more chocolate...

I'll let you unwrap that one.