How far have women come?

@Getty Images / FIFA https://fifa.fans/32938kF

The role of women in professional sport in the 21st century still is such that there is still a huge gap between the opportunities, funding and media presence of men and women. As described in the last few articles, it is the traditional perception and treatment of women that makes progress so slow. Challenging stereotypes, breaking down biases, promoting inclusion and respect for women takes time, will and courage to address and change the status quo.

"Human rights are women's rights and women's rights are human rights, once and for all" - Hillary Clinton, 1995

On this day 25 years ago, Hillary Clinton gave a powerful speech at the UN's Fourth Conference on Women. She raised a lot of points, which are still valid and not solved today.

At the moment there is a lot of discussion in the world, including in the world of sports. Topics such as diversity in decision-making positions, women athletes bring equal to men, the integration of women and other minorities into the executive level in the sports industry, the treatment of women in sports, at work and in online communities, as well as the involvement of men in family and household tasks are issues that needs to be looked at and worked on. We have been talking about all of these already and yet not tackled.

The visibility of women athletes, trainers and supporters in today's sports world has increased from their status a little more than a century ago. Women in sports have become more active and visible particularly in the last 25 years, and yet social norms and stereotypes weigh heavily and slow down the goal of gender equality. What is holding women back and why do we still need to talk about change? 

The help of the digital age

The increased visibility is mainly due to the spread of the Internet and social media but credit is also due to the women who took chances, challenged societal norms and dared to be different like Billie Jean King and more recently, Megan Rapinoe, Serena Williams or Ada Hegerberg. 

The presence of women’s sport on television is, with a few exceptions, not the norm. Nothing has really changed over the past years, despite huge TV ratings for example, the FIFA Women’s World Cup in France. It is still a novelty to watch purely female competitions, such as skiing on television, on a regular basis. Women’s leagues in any sport are mostly not televised either. Outside the period of major sporting events, statistics claim that 40% of all sports participants are women, yet women’s sports receive only around 4% of all sports media coverage. And, of that limited coverage, women are often objectified or demeaned as opposed to men. 

The digital age certainly helps to get more female-centric content out, especially on social media. It is driving women’s sport to the forefront of distribution with social and digital platforms leading the boost at 84% of output. Instagram is leading the way for engagement with 59% followed by Facebook (40%).

Copa90 is a great example for pivoting the women's game on social platforms and engaging fans around the world.

Pledges and commitments from the top to drive change

Time and again, charters or pledges had to be passed by bodies such as the UN, UNESCO or the IOC before institutions and companies would address the issue. Voluntary willingness did not seem to work for a long time. Too great was the apparent fear among men of being outranked by women or of losing supposed sovereignty over decisions.

Some sports organisations are more progressive, such as the World Marathon Majors, which since 2006 has been distributing uniform prize money for the best woman and the best man. https://www.worldmarathonmajors.com/news-media/latest-news/abbottwmm-expands-prize-structure-introduces-charity-program/

Tennis has also followed suit. Since 2007, there has been equal prize money in all four majors - the Australian Open, US Open, French Open and Wimbledon. But female players are paid significantly less at women-only events when compared with similar sized men's events. 

In the last 25 years, great progress has also been made in terms of access to international sports competitions. The number of countries that send all-male teams to the Olympics is steadily shrinking. At the 1992 Olympic Games in Barcelona, there were 35 all-male teams, in 1996 in Atlanta there were 26 and in 2000 in Sydney, only 12. In London 2012, for the first time, there was not a single team that took part without women. However, the last Olympic Games in Rio changed that. Three nations competed without women: Monaco, the Pacific islands of Nauru, Tuvalu and Vanuatu, and Iraq. 

Nevertheless, changes that lead to equality and balance at the management level are progressing only slowly. In 2005, only 12 of the 116 members of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) were women. Of the 202 National Olympic Committees (NOCs), only nine have female presidents, five of them in Africa. 

As part of its women and sports policy, the IOC set itself the goal in 1997 of increasing the number of women in leadership positions to 10 percent by 2001 and 20 percent by 2005. In 2016, following the recommendation of the IOC Women in Sport Commission, the IOC Executive Board approved a revised gender equality target to 30% for the Olympic Movement constituents: “Members of the Olympic Movement are advised to set a minimum target of 30 per cent for women’s representation in their governing bodies by 2020, and to adopt accompanying measures that will help them to reach this goal.” What is the date again? September 6, 2020.

Are we there yet?

Are we close?

No, unfortunately not.

Lack of commitment at the core 

But the intention to bring these long needed goals into the sports business outside of the IOC was not yet successful. According to the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) the proportion of women on the boards of national sport federations is well below the gender balance zone of 40–60%, with an average of 14% across European Union countries.

The same disappointing scenario is seen in the boardroom of community sport clubs in several European countries - gender diversity levels are low across Europe. In voluntary work, which still accounts for a large part of the European sports world, women consistently occupy hardly more than 20% of the voluntary leadership positions in national and international sports bodies. The main differences are in the areas of responsibility and the power of the positions: Presidents or Directors are predominantly men, as are decision-makers in high-performance sport and public relations. Women's fields of responsibility tend to be mass sports, girls' and women's sports, family, youth and para sports.

Within national Olympic governing bodies (NGBs), 85.3% of those governing bodies are composed of all-male leadership teams, while 14.1% have male/female leadership teams, and only one (.5%), Zambia, has an all-female leadership team. 

As of 10 January 2020, the IOC reached its goal of having a minimum of 30% women in decision-making positions with 36 out of the 100 active IOC members being women. Four women (26.7%) are members of the Executive Board and as of May 2020, women chair 11 of the 30 IOC Commissions (36%). An increase, for sure. And a glimpse of hope that others will follow suit. 

As in sport, role models are important in the professional world as well. But voices that are heard are also very important. Talking about issues opens eyes, because people are often metaphorically blind, especially when it comes to topics that are uncomfortable, because they are part of the problem themselves. It is not about pointing fingers at others, but about showing that things can work even better together. 

Evidence is there

The task is a complex one. The sports industry is very much diverse and a lot of stakeholders are in it.

Where do we start?

And how?

Questions that I ask myself a lot and also hear a lot. It is clear that bringing problems to the surface is a start. Acknowledging facts and research is helpful to minimise critics and fear of taking the path of diversity. We all want to be more successful and the bottom line needs to be right in order to grow and advance. When profitable companies move from 0% to 30% female leaders, their associated increase of net revenue margin is up by 15%. That's promising, isn't it? So why do we wait to get more women into the boardrooms?

Or how about this one:

Or here is another statistic: Companies with more women in decision-making roles continue to generate higher market returns and superior profits. Not yet convinced that diversity in leadership positions can help, especially in the current situation? You find plenty of data and research from all kinds of industries and geographies, but more data won't fix the problem. It is the leaders of today who need to fix the problem. The ones that were trusted by their founders or shareholders to successfully advance the business. If you don't disrupt your own business, someone else will. And navigating disruption requires different perspectives, and diversity efforts will help to gain different views and experiences.

Science proves that it is now only a matter of courage to take a new path and to do so with full conviction. There is no risk if it is approached correctly. Passion and commitment behind a decision towards greater gender parity is the first step. Let's see who else will become a role-model by taking the important first step and become a real disruptor for our industry.

Everything is impossible, if you are not trying.