[MW Forums]

Apple held its annual shareholders meeting at the company’s headquarters on Thursday. While the majority of the question and answer period went smoothly, a group of environmentalists drew the ire of Apple CEO Steve Jobs as he sought to set the record straight. more

[jmincey]

I'm almost positive at least two independent studies have shown Apple to be on balance a pretty environment unfriendly company. I'm too bogged down at work to do a Google search for citations for this however.
On the question of the total lack of women on the Apple board -- well, good damn question. In a company which practices no sexism and which evaluates people solely on merit, there should be at least ONE woman board member out of eight or twelve (or however many people make up Apple's board).
Jobs does have some female direct reports (at the VP level), so I don't suggest this is an all-or-nothing proposition. Still, at least one woman should be represented on the board -- NOT because she is a woman but simply because Apple needs to choose on merit and if it does so I contend this will not result in a single-gender board.

[mac_the_knife]

Is there a transcript of this anywhere? Might be an interesting read...

[tabasco_hot]

jmincey, why put a woman on the board just for the sake of having a woman on the board? That's a stupid idea. Put the best possible board members you can get on the board, but don't degrade all women by putting someone that wasn't the best first, best second, or best third choice on the board just so you have a woman on the board.

[jmincey]

What did I just say? I made a point to say that Apple should NOT put a woman on the board merely because she is a woman. I said it should be about MERIT. I simply contend that if merit alone is to carry the day, women WILL be represented at least to SOME extent. If they are nowhere to be found on a board, this tells me a company is factoring in criteria other than merit alone.
You pick 12 qualified people, what are the odds they will ALL be from the same gender? You tell me.

[muppetdog]

tobasco_hot: i'm sure Jeff will respond to your post...but in his defense i don't think you read what he said correctly. he's saying that if Apple truly uses the merit system there should be at least one woman who qualified to make the Board.
then again, maybe there's no women because the qualified ones have no desire to be on the board. maybe they know something we guys don't.
dames 're sensitive like dat, y'know? /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Nobody]

Are you suggesting that one or more board members should be dismissed for having a penis? This would be a discriminatory action. Apple's non-discriminatory practices are demonstrated in all levels of management. You cannot have the diversity that appears in society exactly reflected in all departments and levels of management without practicing discrimination.

[elCapiton]

How do you know that they didn't interview women and find none of them as good as the ones they chose?

[elCapiton]

I'm glad to see these egocentric environmentalists shot down about every issue they raised. Nothing wrong with fighting for the environment but at least get your facts straight.
Just the mentality of them from recent news makes them seem like they think they're all high and mighty.

[jmincey]

"How do you know that they didn't interview women and find none of them as good as the ones they chose?"
How do I know? Law of probability. Women are the majority of students in colleges and universities, they are the majority of students even in business schools today (which represents a departure over some time ago), and they are certainly the majority of the raw population. I don't think anyone (except sexist dinosaurs) suggests that women are not as intelligent or capable as men.
Therefore, it doesn't take rocket science to conclude that out of however many seats available on Apple's board, if the selection process were gender-blind and based on merit alone, at least ONE woman would be among them, (which itself would constitute a number disproportionate to that which is represented in the general population).

[TheTSArt]

I hear Carly Fiorina is available... /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[jmincey]

Ha -- good one. If THAT is an example of the alternative, then I say bring on the men! /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[scottellsworth]

Jeff:
Your contention that there should be at least one woman on the seven member board ignores the rather scanty supply of qualified women in the top spots of American companies. At least if we are selecting on merit and from the same pool male board members are selected from.
Take a look at qualifications of the current board members:
Fred D. Anderson
Partner, Elevation Partners
Former CFO, Apple Computer, Inc.
Bill Campbell
Chairman and former CEO
Intuit Corp.
Millard Drexler
Chairman and CEO
J. Crew
Albert Gore Jr.
Former Vice President of the United States
Steve Jobs
CEO, Apple
CEO, Pixar
Arthur D. Levinson, Ph. D.
Chairman and CEO
Genentech
Jerry York
Chairman, President and CEO
Harwinton Capital
In other words, of the seven board members listed at Apple's Investor Relations site, most are currently holding CEO or Chairman positions at a major company. The two exceptions are the former Vice President and Apple's own former CFO. Six out of seven, in other words, come from the top position of another company, or the number two spot in our government. Very few women make it into those positions, so the pool is quite small. Far fewer than one company in seven among the fortune 100 has a female CEO, at least the last time I looked. (If you have contrary information, do post an URL.)
Unless, of course, you are contending that female board members should not be former CEOs and the like, unlike their male counterparts?
As you point out, Apple does have some women in the executive suite, thus this imbalance is likely to change in the future, but I do not see this as a great black mark now. The right thing to do is what they are doing - appoint women to high visibility, high responsibility jobs within the company, as that grows the potential pool of potential female board members.
Scott

[leroybrown]

Just using the laws of probability is overly simplistic. It's the same as assuming that the Department of Labor's wage gap figures indicate that women are being systemically discriminated against.
There are biological, cultural and social events that influence which genders go into which positions. It's not just throwing the dice onto the table and seeing where they land.