TOKYO (Reuters) – About one-fifth of Japanese companies have no female managers and most say women account for less than 10% of management, a Reuters monthly poll found, highlighting the struggle for the government’s “womenomics” drive to make headway.
The survey results come as Japan is seen to delay its target this year to raise the share of women in leadership posts to 30% as part of the government’s campaign to empower women, dubbed “womenomics”, and cope with Japan’s ageing population.
The Reuters Corporate Survey, conducted Sept. 29-Oct. 8, found 71% of Japanese firms said women accounted for less than 10% of management, while 17% had no female managers at all.
Asked how much scope there was to increase female managers, 55% said by around 10%, a quarter said by about 20%, one in 10 firms said by around 30%, while 5% saw no room for that.
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Army’s Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft program passed through the Army Requirements Oversight Council’s gauntlet and received preliminary approval of its abbreviated capabilities development document, bringing the aircraft a step closer to a competitive procurement, according to the head of the service’s future vertical lift efforts.
The service is on a tight timeline to field a brand-new, long-range assault aircraft by 2030.
“The AROC went well,” Brig. Gen. Wally Rugen told Defense News in an Oct. 6 interview. “The aviation enterprise continues to impress me, just our ability to drive on these tough administrative and requirements tasks and get them done on time and do what we said we were going to do.”
At the time of the interview, not all of the paperwork was signed and the ink wasn’t dry. However, Rugen said, “it was probably one of the best AROCs I have attended in my
It’s happening slowly but surely. With every passing week, more venture firms are beginning to announce SPACs. The veritable blitz of SPACs formed by investor Chamath Palihapitiya notwithstanding, we’ve now seen a SPAC (or plans for a SPAC) revealed by Ribbit Capital, Lux Capital, the travel-focused venture firm Thayer Ventures, Tusk Ventures’s founder Bradley Tusk, the SoftBank Vision Fund, and FirstMark Capital, among others. Indeed, while many firms say they’re still in the information-gathering phase of what could become a sweeping new trend, others are diving in headfirst.
To better understand what’s happening out there, we talked on Friday with Amish Jani, the cofounder of FirstMark Capital in New York and the president of a new $360 million tech-focused blank-check company organized by Jani and his partner, Rick Heitzmann. We wanted to know why a venture firm that has historically focused on early-stage, privately held companies would be interested in
LONDON — Lawmakers from countries within the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing alliance have warned tech firms that unbreakable encryption technology “creates severe risks to public safety.”
Ministers from the U.S., U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand published a statement Sunday calling on the tech industry to develop a solution that enabled law enforcement to access tightly encrypted messages.
“We urge industry to address our serious concerns where encryption is applied in a way that wholly precludes any legal access to content,” the statement, which was signed by
One of the great puzzles of the corporate world is why big corporations are still being run on obsolete 20th Century management principles when there is an obvious better alternative—21st Century management—that is producing unprecedented financial returns and market capitalizations.
“Most [firms] today are run on the basis of ‘legacy’ management systems that have become obsolete,” writes Menlo College professor Annika Steiber in The Silicon Valley Model. But why?
Even though 20th Century management is a coherent and consistent way of running a company, it is an increasingly poor fit with today’s fast-moving customer-driven marketplace. It has difficulty changing direction. It lacks agility. Here are ten reasons why 20th Century management still dominates.
1. 20th Century Management Operates As An Unstoppable Flywheel
Since 1970, 20th Century management has been preoccupied with a single-minded
Following the first five of Ten Reasons Why Big Firms Stick With 20th Century Management, here are five more reasons:
1. The Transition To 21st Century Management Is Hard Work
Stopping the momentum of the giant flywheel of 20th Century management and turning it into something more agile can involve a lot of work. Everything in 21st Century management is the opposite of 20th Century management.
The goal of the firm is now to create a continuous stream of value for customers and users. Making money is the result, not the goal. This goal requires a different structure of work to enable the full talents of those doing the work, often through small self-organizing teams working in short cycles, focused tightly on delivering value for customers. Instead of a steep vertical
Artificial intelligence is one of the buzziest technologies of the past 20 years.
Since 2000, investors have poured roughly $407 billion into AI startups, per data from PitchBook.
In that time frame, the top 12 VC firms most active in early-stage AI investing by deal count have collectively closed a total of 708 Series A and B rounds, according to the data analytics firm.
Visit Business Insider’s homepage for more stories.
Over the past two decades, artificial intelligence has quickly become one of the most buzzy technologies.
Giants like IBM have doubled-down on AI-backed offerings, while a rush of startups have emerged that are trying to use the tech to overhaul operations ranging from stocking shelves to supply chain negotiations.
Along with that has come a bonanza of venture capital funding that has created so-called unicorns like Indigo Ag, UiPath, and SenseTime. In the past 20 years, investors have poured
A top executive at a Singapore firm seeking to buy Newcastle United has quit after police launched a probe into his activities, the company said Wednesday, the latest turmoil for the bid.
Bellagraph Nova Group, founded by two Singaporean entrepreneurs and a Chinese business partner, announced in August it was in “advanced talks” to buy the English Premier League team.
But the bid became mired in controversy over allegations that photos had been doctored to show the trio meeting with former US president Barack Obama, and other inconsistent claims.
Police then began investigating a company linked to Singaporean co-founders Terence and Nelson Loh, after an accounting firm lodged a report over unauthorised signatures on the group’s financial statements.
BN Group said in a statement that Terence Loh has now quit the firm to try and resolve the issues related to the police probe into Novena Global Healthcare.
Commercial banks could become technology firms by cooperating with technology firms, including telcos, to create a new growth space.
Le Huu Duc, president of Military Bank, said the bank has decided to highlight digital banking as the focus in its development strategy.
Minister of Information and Communications Nguyen Manh Hung (right) and MBBank President Luu Trung Thai
To turn this into reality, Military Bank has cooperated with technology firms such as IBM, Oracle and Viettel in an effort to optimize the digital transformation solution.
The bank has put a digital loyalty point system into operation, which allows users to buy services and exchange points. It has also tried robotic payments, and applied digital signature and electronic authentication (eKYC) on an app platform.
Luu Trung Thai, CEO of Military Bank, said the bank wants to become a leading digital firm in the next three years.
The forthcoming antitrust proposal by the US House of Representatives is being called a “thinly veiled call to break up” large technology firms including Apple, Google, and Facebook.
Following the US House of Representative’s final hearing on the topic of big tech antitrust, a draft response claims that the as-yet unreleased proposals call for the breakup of Apple, Amazon, Facebook, and Google.
According to Reuters, Republican Congressman Ken Buck has responded to the forthcoming report, criticizing its main conclusions. “This proposal is a thinly veiled call to break up Big Tech firms,” he wrote. “We do not agree with the majority’s approach.”
While Buck writes that he agrees with concerns about Big Tech, he objects to the report’s plan to require companies to delineate a clear “single line of business.” He reportedly points out that Amazon, for example, runs both its ecommerce store and the separate but hugely