• Home
• ClearlySo businesses
• Events
• Jobs
• Investment
• B2B deals
• Resources & library
• Blogs
• Membership
• About us

One of the most remarkable facts (which I duly tweeted) from the Tallberg Forum was that 56.2% of the MPs in Rwanda were female. This vied with with the etymology of the name “Saab” (Swedish Airplanes AB, set up in 1937 to build up Sweden’s war effort) for “fact of the conference”. While knowing how the name Saab arose is interesting and will give me something to say at any upcoming cocktail party, I feel the high proportion of female MPs in Rwanda has more profound implications and may foreshadow a pattern we will increasingly see as we enter the Social Economy.

It is worth noting that not only have women come to dominate the post-crisis political world in Rwanda, but the country has made an unbelievably remarkable transition since the sectarian bloodshed of the 1990s. Perhaps the nation turned to women as they had far less blood on their hands? I cannot say and would not presume to be able to offer any authoritative answers, but we can speculate. I do wonder if also the nation felt, that in the aftermath of the genocide, women were perhaps a much safer bet. After all, there are very few (are there any?) instances in history when large bands of women go on a senseless murderous rampage. I have a suspicion that following on from this appalling catastrophe, women seemed a much safer bet.

Although far less tragic, cataclysmic financial developments in Iceland are also interesting in this regard. This small economy and its financial system simply melted down as a result of what appear to be “cowboy practices”. It is not also of interest that, in response, women have seized (or been given) all the senior positions in politics and finance? A fascinating pattern or just an unrelated coincidence. It is not clear.

Tallberg is about 50/50. I have been told it is a matter of policy–which I cannot confirm. What I can say is that this figure seemed accurate, based upon my unscientific analysis of the attendees (and the speakers, of whom the most famous was the Norwegian politician, Gro Harlem Bruntland). The conference hardly suffered as a result and is many ways was far more refreshing than the male-dominated affairs which seem the norm.

As I consider the leading lights in the UK social business sector, the large percentage of females is also notable. Cafe Direct and Divine, both leaders from the fairtrade sector, are managed by women. Abel & Cole and Organix, two highly successful commercial social businesses from the food sector, are run by women, and the most successful social business dotcom, Justgiving.com, is run by two women. I could go on.

The point is not that men cannot run great social businesses and enterprises–they do in abundance. What I do observe is that the world is less male dominated than the “mainstream” where I spent most of my career. If the mainstream economy has stumbled, in part due to the overly strong focus on profit maximisation at all costs, then I have written that the Social Economy will contain a greater balance of objectives. Women are often considered, by most stereotypes, to be better equipped to engage in this delicate balancing. I am not privy to research on whether or not this is “true”, but if it is, then it is unsurprising we see more women in the Social Economy. Reserach also seems to suggest that they deal more easily in conflict situations, or cope better with stress, and lets face it, these are stressful times. Possibly on a deep psychological basis, this crisis causes us to seek some “maternal” reassurance? If so, we can expect an increasingly percentage of women to come to the fore as the economy becomes more social.

Rodney Schwartz

Comments