In Equal numbers
by Eimi Watanabe
In 1984, Jim Grant responded by establishing a joint staff/management task force to review the current situation of women in UNICEF and to recommend action to achieve the objectives set by the General Assembly. I was privileged to lead the exercise.
The Task Force was given a free hand, and management participation was in the form of the full support from the Division of Personnel in accessing confidential staff data for statistical analysis and in the assignment of a full-time computer-savvy assistant. Given corporate goal-orientation and use of statistics in advocacy, the Task Force focused its analysis and presentation on HR statistics, combined with qualitative information gained through interviews in HQ and twenty-five field offices.
The statistical analysis basically confirmed our perception that the proportion of women diminished with advancing rank down to 6% at level D1 and above, that women took longer than men to be promoted, and this despite the fact that they were more qualified according to two objectively verifiable criteria (UN languages, academic qualification). Women were also a small minority among external recruits to D1s and above.
The most striking statistical gender difference was in marital status. In all categories of staff (except for GS staff in the 25 field offices surveyed), the majority of men in UNICEF were married, whereas the majority of women were not. Among international core professionals, just 33% of women compared to 85% of men were married. These findings were backed up by field office and NYHQs interviews which brought out the difficulty of combining a UNICEF career with family life, and the need for support systems, especially for staff with young children. The report made several suggestions on how this might be done, critical as we considered that UNICEF should be at the forefront among UN agencies in developing practices which accommodate the demands of family lives for women and men to the extent possible while not compromising its rotation policy.
The Task Force reviewed existing personnel procedures including annual staff development reviews, appointments and promotion systems, performance evaluation, and training and career development policies. The overall conclusion was that systems were adequate, but in operationalizing them, UNICEF managers needed greater awareness as to how these systems were impacting women and make conscious efforts to change. For example, managers should seek out and ensure, to the extent possible, the presence of women candidates when considering appointments, and the managers’ performance in this regard should be reflected in their performance evaluation.
The Task Force concluded with a recommendation of achieving 30% of women staff at the professional levels in five years, with indicative targets for every level. Towards this goal, we argued for giving women the same opportunities as for men, whether in an HQ or field-based post, and not presume that women cannot perform certain functions. Further, we maintained, if a few women did not perform up to par in a new post, to not attribute the inadequacy to her gender.
With Jim Grant firmly in the lead, executive management were persuaded by the findings and our arguments, and the goals were adopted. The Division of Personnel actively implemented changes in the following years, to the extent that UNICEF was seen again as a leader among UN organizations. The task force format and report itself became a model for other UN organizations at that time. As proof of UNICEF’s continued leadership, UNICEF had reached the 50% target for professionals by 2010.
The report came at the right time, as women’s issues were on the global agenda, and we had a mostly receptive senior management, and an Executive Board whose vocal, “like-minded” governments were fully supportive of improving women’s situation within UNICEF.
Another key factor behind our success was Ethel Grant, Jim’s late first wife. Ethel never interfered in UNICEF’s work, but obviously took a keen interest, and during Executive Board meetings, she was often seen seated in the back row, following the proceedings. I had come to know her quite well, and thus had the opportunity to talk to her generally about the situation of women and the Task Force’s work. We did not compromise Ethel or ourselves by asking her to intervene. But she remarked at the end of our talk, “Jim has the right instincts, but is, after all, a man of his generation”. I am fully convinced that over the coming days, weeks and months, Ethel quietly, and very effectively, worked on her husband.
From its inception, the Task Force was not about taking up individual cases. However, I, along with a few like-minded colleagues, did play a role in promoting the selection of a highly qualified woman into the key post of Deputy Director of Personnel which had become vacant while the Task Force was working on its report. The staff member concerned had not even considered the post, but we managed to coax her into applying, arguing that her appointment to this post would have a significant impact. There was already a candidate favoured by the Deputy Executive Director of Operations and the Director of Personnel, direct supervisors of this post; all three were, however, male, European. For us, it was thus a “no brainer” when a highly qualified woman existed as a candidate. Leadership was apparently split on the selection, and one day, the Deputy Executive Director visited me unannounced in my office, to persuade me to change my mind, even though I played no role in the decision making process. No way! However, Jim and others must have also seen this as a “no brainer”, and the woman candidate was selected for the post. Apart from this one case, neither myself nor others in the Task Force tried to intervene in concrete selection processes, but somehow, this one incidence was enough to establish the reputation that we had clout!
On a personal note, I have sometimes reflected on whether I had experienced discrimination because of my gender at any point in my career. Minor instances of harassment, yes, but what I did experience instead was that being a Japanese and a woman meant that some colleagues assumed that my promotions and senior appointments resulted from these external attributes rather than through my own merit. Annoying, but one can’t do much about such perceptions.
Comments
Post a Comment