- In today’s CEO Daily: Phil Wahba digs into the trend of activists targeting female CEOs.
- The big story: All eyes on the Fed.
- The markets: Mixed, with Asia recording narrow losses.
- Plus: All the news and watercooler chat from Fortune.
Good morning. When Victoria’s Secret reported stellar quarterly results last week, shares shot up 14% and likely gave Hillary Super some breathing room from the activist investors pushing the lingerie company to, among other things, consider whether the CEO of 16 months is up to the task of turning it around.
Of course, the potential of having to deal with an activist investor’s campaign goes with the territory of being a CEO, especially at a company that has been struggling. But Super’s saga is a reminder that women CEOs remain much likelier than their male counterparts to be targeted by activist investors.
This year, according to a report last week by the Conference Board with Esgauge data, women have made up 8% of the CEOs in the Russell 3000 index but accounted for 15% of activist campaigns specifically targeting chief executives. Other women to have recently confronted activists: Cracker Barrel’s Julie Masino, who survived a campaign, and Vail Resorts’ Kirsten Lynch, who did not.
What makes the Conference Board report especially frustrating is that it adds more proof points to an old, seemingly intractable trend.
In 2015, the New York Times’ DealBook pondered “Do Activist Investors Target Female CEOs?” while Fortune’s Pattie Sellers asked “Does Nelson Peltz have a problem with women?” In 2017, Harvard Law School found that women CEOs had almost a 50% higher probability than men of becoming the target of shareholder activism.
Why? One reason, the Conference Board theorized, is rooted in a stereotype that women are more cooperative. It’s also conceivable that the trend reflects the glass cliff phenomenon in which women often take the helm of companies in decline. But there is almost certainly some bias at play. The Conference Board research showed that women targeted by activists face the same odds of being canned whether they turn things around or not, while male CEOs are less likely to be ousted when results improve.
Some of the most prominent women chief executives ever have tangled with activists: PepsiCo’s ex-CEO Indra Nooyi, ex-Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer, ex-DuPont CEO Ellen Kullman, ex-Mondelez CEO Irene Rosenfeld, ex-HP CEO Meg Whitman, and Mary Barra, still at GM. Michelle Gass, now thriving as CEO of Levi Strauss & Co, dealt with not one but three activist campaigns as she tried to fix Kohl’s.
Everyone should be held accountable when their company is failing or on a bad path. But it is worth wondering what this extra hurdle women CEOs face is costing us. Activist campaigns are bruising to the company but also to a CEO’s reputation. Does this mean boards might be more likely to avoid naming a woman to lower the odds of an activist campaign, or that fewer women will throw their hat in the ring?
Either way, it seems the phenomenon could needlessly be costing corporate America some much needed talent.—Phil Wahba
Contact CEO Daily via Diane Brady at diane.brady@fortune.com
