Female top talent in the waiting room Company Monitor 2012 – 2015 Commissie Monitoring TndT/Wbt | VanDoorneHuiskes en partners

Chair Gerdi A. VerbeetJoop Schippers Thessa Menssen Herman Dijkhuizen Since January 1 st 2013: legal target figure of at least 30% women and 30% men in executive and supervisory boards of large companies comply or explain Monitor Committee

Organizing the monitor Selection of companies: multiple criteria – no list available – some companies try to ‘hide away’ Development of a survey: not only facts and figures, but also background information Keep ‘hunting’ companies until they have completed the survey Analyses Great job by researchers Babette Pouwels and Wilma Henderikse (VanDoorneHuiskes en partners)

30% M/F-composition executive (exeb) and supervisory boards (supb) exebsupb % women 30%

Only a small share of companies has realised the target figure 30% m/f realised 14,2 exeb supb

% Large share of companies has no women on (the) board(s) % % % exebsupb 0% women 63.3

Little use of opportunities to appoint new female boardmembers exeb supb

Transparancy in annual reports leaves much to be desired Less than 10% lives up to all legal reporting obligations 57% gives no explanation for not complying with the 30% target Many company come up with weak excuses for not complying Most accountants do not feel responsible for compliance in the annual report

Top 200 largest companies 2015: Show more improvement More vacant positions go to women (though more in supervisory than in executive boards): 70% of companies with vacancies in the supervisory board appointed at least one woman

Recommendations by the Monitor Committee Stick to the legal target figure for four more years and set out a path towards the goal: –20% by December 31st 2019 –30% by December 31st 2023 Set a legally binding quota as a next step if companies make too little progress Extend the target figure to the (semi-)public sector (including politics) Use the new term to create a sense of urgency among shareholders and works councils (as relevant stakeholders/countervailing power)

Women in public office 11, Full professors 16% Mayors of big municipalities (> 150,000) 0% Royal commissioner (CdK) 8% Aldermen 21% High civil servants 28% Town clerk 29%

Conclusion Successive reports show a big discrepancy between rationality and tradition Traditional selection of (male) boardmembers ignores the enormous pool of talent we have mobilized over the last three/four decades by investing heavily (and succesfully!) in female education It would be rational and economically beneficial to make better use of that talent