To celebrate International Women’s Day, ‘Leaders set sail for Change‘ is an article that brings together four female leaders to discuss whether the social movements of the past year changed the way they do their jobs.
How leaders started to set sail for change?
In 2017 the combined anger of women turned the #metoo sexual harassment relations into a political force.
The societal change was much broader, impacting on business and businesswomen across diverse fronts from the disillusion with authority figures to the perils of fact free communication via social media.
Much positive change occurred too and for International Women’s Day, bluenotes asked four female leaders whether the social movements of the past year had changed the way they do their jobs and how as leaders they changed.
Rhonda Brighton-Hall: Making sure all women – not just powerful ones are heard
The social movement combined with a few other things in my life last year made me take stock of my own voice.
I decided to create conversations more people could join in.
I’ve started using my own social media to ask questions and encourage others to have opinions, to get involved.
I’ve used my own business to change conversations which used to belong only to big corporates.
I found new voices and gave them a platform from which to speak.
I started to see a change in leadership amongst many places and they started to get louder too.
In short, I got quietly louder and made space for others to be louder too.
Edit Weiner: Getting to the truth in a world of spin and misinformation
So my leadership style has always been to try and elevate the level of everyone I have ever worked with, in terms of my audiences and clients and all the non-profits I started and the women’s organisations I have started.
I want to elevate the level of their respect for everyone and their respect for truth, for the inevitable, and their respect for the creativity and innovation which can change things for the better – both personally and organisationally.
I try to get to the truth of thing. The hardest part of my job, frankly is objectively.
And I have been working at this for 50 years and I can tell you I may be more objective than the average bear.
Michelle Jablko: Balancing Business Decisions with Social Responsibility
When things come across my desk, the first question I ask is: how does that fit with our purpose, our expectations of ourselves and the community’s expectations of us?
At ANZ, we have a clear purpose, which is to shape a world where people and communities thrive. “Shape” is a proactive word, rather than “help”. It is about actively doing things.
Social responsibility is not necessarily at odds with what is good for business.
When you are a big business, what is good for your customers and the community is good for your business in the longer term. So, you might give up something in the short term to drive a better longer-term outcome.
I’ve been involved with a lot of businesses over the years and we do take hard calls to do something better for our customers or our people over the long-term versus the short-term outcome.
We are going to make the decision which is right in the broader sense.
We support a whole lot of causes and there are people in our workforce who are very passionate about a lot of things. So, as a group, we thought we should be really clear on which causes we should take a leadership position on.
As a bank, what would we be expected to have a voice on? We went through a long exercise of debating that and the first thing which came up was housing accessibility – because housing is a big part of our balance sheet.
Housing accessibility is not just housing affordability.
The second cause was the environment, because we are a business which funds business and, while we don’t have a direct impact on the environment, a lot of our customer businesses do.
The third one is financial participation. If you want to have a world in which people and communities thrive and you are a bank, we think fostering participation is important.
We support other things and other causes but, if we are going to have a voice on things, they are the three.
Jan Owens: Power to the (young) people
Institutions around the world are degrading or are not fit for purpose in the Twenty First Century and they all have to be reimagined or redesigned or recast.
While that is going on, you are seeing other movements crop up to address particular issues or challenges.
There is traditional leadership and there is movement-based leadership – which is incredibly powerful and is not mandated in the usual way by the institutions.
During the Marriage Equality survey, we saw young people in record numbers enrolling to vote –65,000 of them. They decided to get onto the voting system, not because they wanted to vote, but because of marriage equality and their very strong perception about what was fair and what wasn’t. There is very clear data that they influenced the outcome.
There is something about young people at the moment being very, very conscious about issues and fairness and equity.
I think there is also a very strong trend around what we are seeing in Florida (in the wake of the latest US gun massacre) around student agency. I saw some incredible quotes about young people having to protect themselves and adults not doing it for them.
Then, there is also a strong trend around diversity. Is everybody getting access to the same opportunities? If you take that to the next generation, they see it as more than about women. They see it as diversity, people of colour, people of different abilities, all of that.
The issue for leaders is there are lots of Leaders. You may think you have institutional leadership, but there is a heap of other leadership which is going on around you all the time.
If you spend any time on YouTube or social media, you absolutely understand – particularly for the under 35 age group – there are a lot of people who are hugely more influential than almost any politician in this country at a non-policy level.
I am looking for leaders who are involved in the systemic change which needs to happen, the institutional change to improve our ability to live together, improve the economic outlook for people and improve social connectivity and inclusion.
If there was one kind of leader we need, a new kind of leader, it is that leader who is going to help redesign, reconfigure and reimagine institutional leadership.