Home / Data / Glass Ceiling Persists in the Chemical Industry

A recent article in Chemical and Engineering News shows that little progress has been made by women in the chemical industry. According to the report:

Women made some progress in the past year. They comprise 12.1% of 405 directors at 42 publicly traded chemical companies and companies that have significant chemical businesses. This is a modest increase from the 11.5% in the 2007 survey, but it is lower than the 12.8% figure C&EN tabulated in 2003. In addition, an average of 1.2 female directors serve per company, a slight increase from 1.1 in 2007.

However, the survey finds that fewer women are serving as top executives—some 8.1% out of 407 executive officers compared with 8.4% in the 2007 survey. The number of female executive officers per company has remained the same at 0.8.

Nance K. Dicciani, who recently retired as CEO of specialty materials for Honeywell, discusses the importance of creating an environment in the chemical industry that attracts and rewards women:

Cultivating a nurturing corporate environment isn’t rocket science, just commonsense business practice. There are enough talented women ready to advance such that any environment that recognizes and rewards talent will also advance women. It comes down to paying for performance and giving people opportunities. When people demonstrate talent, desire, and capability and start building a track record, take some bets on them no matter who they are and what their background is.

Chemical & Engineering News

Chemical & Engineering News

  • Agreed that women should be better represented.

    The more general quote, “U.S. chemical companies need more engineering and science graduates than the country’s universities are turning out” , is pure B.S. I’ve been reading this crap from the Chemical industry for 40 years, but hardly have ever met a chemist who wasn’t under employed. The basic economic lot of chemists has steadily declined for 40 years. If there ever were a real shortage, then people would be making better salaries, in real terms, not worse ones
  • Yes larry p, you make a good point and I have edited the piece to remove that quote. The idea that we need more science graduates doesn’t correlate at all with my observations of out-of-work Ph.D.s
blog comments powered by Disqus