A small piece in The Times today caught my eye. It reported that "Women are finally cracking the glass ceiling of the judiciary, with record numbers being appointed to the upper judicial ranks ..." Nearly half (47%) of the 263 candidates recently recommended for appointment by the Judicial Appointments Commission were women. There are now 21 women in the High Court (out of 108). The chairman of the JAC commented that "Together, these women are changing the face of the judiciary." I agree.
Earlier this week, I attended an event where several female High Court Judges were present. What really struck me was that they were not made up of one "type". The changing face of the judiciary is not just more diverse in gender terms; there also seems to be a greater diversity in personality.
My feeling is that we are reaching a tipping point where the fact that a senior judge is a woman is no longer going to be remarkable. A little while ago I was at a court centre where a new female High Court Judge was sitting. "She doesn't look like a High Court Judge does she?" remarked a senior member of the legal profession. That of course all depends on what a High Court Judge looks like!
I also heard a tale of a female High Court Judge being assumed to be a Deputy District Judge because "she was too tiny to sit in the High Court". (Yes people really say these things!) Fortunately, that judge's diminutive status has not impeded her progress to the Court of Appeal.
The very fact that women who do not fit the stereotypical image are now being appointed is bound to encourage others who might not previously have considered judicial appointment. That is why I feel at least in terms of gender we are reaching a critical point where the imbalance is beginning to be corrected.
It is not just in the legal arena that there is a real focus on the fair promotion of women. This is a major topic in the business world. "Cracking the Code" a research report published by KPMG, YSC and the 30% club found that enlightened organisations were dismantling structural barriers, addressing bias and providing development opportunities to help more women progress but there is still much to be done. Men are still 4.5 times more likely to be promoted to senior executive positions than women. Many of the myths used to justify this bias were dispelled by the report.
A recent article in the Harvard Business Review suggested that the uneven sex ratio in senior management was probably due to people in general confusing displays of confidence as signs of competence. Personality traits more often found in men than women may push men to the fore but this does not always result in the best leaders. The conclusion of the article was that traditional systems of selection for management could reward confident men for characteristics that did not in fact reflect competence for the job while at the same time putting major obstacles in the way of highly competent women.
So what is the Judicial Appointments Commission doing well? I believe the answer lies in a system that looks for real evidence of specific competencies. This looks behind the confidence that might in the past have been the main basis for being noticed and seeks individuals with the real qualities and abilities needed for the Bench. Those abilities can be demonstrated in different ways. Indeed, broader experience may be a real benefit. Those who have had a career break may find advantage where once there was a real disadvantage.
Of course, there is still work to be done. It has to be acknowledged that much less progress has been made in terms of ethnic diversity, background and education. However, successfully tackling the gender imbalance is a good start and perhaps lessons can be drawn from that to carry through into other areas. I really hope so. For now, the JAC is to be congratulated on real progress towards cracking that judicial glass ceiling.
Comments