"We have seen real progress in the number of talented women reaching the boards of our top companies ... doing nothing is not an option anymore."
Business secretary Vince Cable's optimism for gender diversity in boardrooms in January was short-lived. He soon admitted: "The momentum appears to be slowing and there has been much less progress in executive appointments at the top."
The push to get more women into senior positions had been enjoying a new spurt of energy since the Davies report was published in 2011. It demanded that top businesses increase the number of women on their boards by 2015, or be threatened with government-imposed quotas.
The threats seemed to be working. Female representation in boardrooms had grown steadily from a meagre 6.2% in 1999 to 12.5% in 2010. After the report things quickly started to get better, peaking at 17.7% in August 2012.
But then the progress stopped, before dipping back to 17.3% in April. Lord Davies' latest annual report noted: "This plateauing at the 17% mark is worrying."
So have efforts to improve diversity stalled? And has the government done enough to push for change at senior levels?
"Some people seem fatigued about the subject," says Helena Morrissey, chief executive of Newton Investment and founder of the 30% Club. "But others are saying that we're not going to let the ball drop this time. We're on to something now. I'm interested in changing all levels and really changing business culture. There's no alternative apart from keeping going."
"The shift in the last three years has been tremendous," she adds. "People's attitudes have changed from 'why is this important' to 'how can we do it'?'"
But some companies are failing to evolve. Last year Cable wrote to eight FTSE 100 companies which still had all-male boardrooms, urging them to tackle the issue. The list comprised Antofagasta, Croda, Glencore, Xstrata, Kazakhmys, Melrose, Randgold and Vedanta. A year on, little has changed.
Randgold finally appointed a single woman to its board in January, but the others remain men-only affairs, according to their websites.
When the Guardian asked them what they were doing to improve diversity, they had very little to say. Only three responded. Glencore stated: "The appointment of a female board director is a significant consideration and an important area of focus for the nominations committee." Kazakhmys said it "takes full account of diversity" when considering appointments, adding: "The percentage of women in management at Kazakhmys is around 22%, which stands up well by international standards." Meanwhile, Antofagasta said it has recently appointed its first female senior executive and has introduced initiatives to address pipeline issues in the mining sector. "Antofagasta looks forward to welcoming women on to the board in due course as it seeks to identify suitable board candidates in line with the current policy," it added.
The other firms either failed to reply or refused to comment. It should be pointed out that Glencore and Xstrata have now merged, and not all the companies are still in the FTSE 100.
So how can the campaign for diversity be re-energised? And how can stubborn companies be encouraged to promote female talent? The answer could lie not just in targets, but in corporate transparency.
"Women are tired of waiting, tired of hoping and tired of being patronised and told things will change," says Fiona Hathorn, managing director of Women On Boards. "What companies need to do is to increase the transparency of the recruitment process."
It's an idea that has taken off in Australia after new stock exchange rules, known as Principle 3, were introduced in 2011. Listed companies not only have to set measurable gender objectives, their annual reports must also publicly disclose their achievements in meeting these targets. And it requires that firms disclose "the proportion of women on the board, in senior management and employed throughout the whole organisation".
"There is no where to hide," explains Hathorn. "The entire board, now have to actually print something – and the next year they can review their progress. But in the UK at the moment, all you're required to do is produce a policy for the board.
"It's called transparency – and when you get that you get attention paid to it, you get management start to manage it. We manage everything in companies, including how many paper clips we buy. So why wouldn't we manage the talent we have?"
Transparency over gender can push firms towards diversity without having to impose controversial quotas, Hathorn says. Naming and shaming can force firms to sit up and listen. "In Australia there have been companies who have had to disclosure their gender pay gap and it was embarrassing," she says. "But it changed very quickly there after."
"Some people will say 'it's not our fault – there aren't any women to promote'. But if you set them a sensible target, they will fill it in less than 12 months. They beat all their targets. There are the women there, but they need to think about what it is about the organisation that stops women applying and getting to senior positions. So we have to be a little bit more creative – we need to go off and look for them and we need to encourage women to apply."
Hawthorn says that most companies no longer intentionally employ men over women, but there is a persistent unconscious bias and culture which can take a long time to change.
"Those companies that do not manage their gender targets should ask themselves what their frightened of discovering. Perhaps the data will show that perhaps, historically, they have not promoted on merit."
This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more content and advice like this direct to your inbox, sign up for our weekly update and careers ebook.
