tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2778600190075875755.post719691706040091368..comments2023-10-25T05:34:44.961-04:00Comments on BullsEyeCareers: Are Americans Really Sexist? 100 Most Powerful Women in the WorldBullsEyeCareershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04574578837443332147noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2778600190075875755.post-80665283291713158892008-09-16T21:32:00.000-04:002008-09-16T21:32:00.000-04:00James,Your points are excellent and well taken.One...James,<BR/><BR/>Your points are excellent and well taken.<BR/><BR/>One other component I would consider when identifying the "available pool" would be one's "desire". <BR/><BR/>Sometimes I wonder if the debate is to increase the number of women in C-Level roles or to increase women's desire for C-Level roles.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2778600190075875755.post-66380398632443682332008-09-16T13:25:00.000-04:002008-09-16T13:25:00.000-04:00Regarding: "there are still major gender bias issu...Regarding: "there are still major gender bias issues on the table since only 3% of America's biggest companies have female chief executives".<BR/><BR/>A percentage alone does not mean there is gender bias. There was only one african american in the men's 2008 swimming competition at the Olympics (that I remember), and there are more african americans then whites in some other American sports. And neither of these are necessarily due to racial bias I would argue.<BR/><BR/>Just my opinion. I think determining gender bias based on this statistical measure is really not a good idea. A better measure would be measuring a ratio that compares the available talent pool to draw from, education of those in the talent pool, demonstrated experience, etc... Based on viable candidates for senior positions, then determine if there is bias, something along those lines.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com