The female perspective
Our story yesterday on women-owned businesses stirred an interesting reaction among some of the female members of the SM team.
Far from admiring the work of some the biggest US companies in their efforts to buy services from women-owned suppliers (and the awards that followed), they found it patronising. They also questioned the (largely American) perception that women-owned businesses fall under the definition “minority supplier”.
I am sure there are many women that would side with the SM teamers, but clearly there are others that revel in the distinction that they are a diverse business.
The Women’s Business Enterprise National Council is an active and vocal organisation in the US, while across the pond WEConnect Europe does similar work. They believe companies owned or run by women are essential, offering unique innovation and vital services. And who’s to argue if they help their members turn a profit?
My bet is that female CEOs are too commercially minded to be concerned by being patronised.
![[Bloglines]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/bloglines.png)
![[del.icio.us]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[Google]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/google.png)
![[LinkedIn]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/linkedin.png)
![[Twitter]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
Surely a supplier should be determined by its ability to deliver a quality product in an acceptable timescale, and offer good value for money. Not whether the owner is Female. There are certain industries, namely manufacturing, where it is virtually impossible to find a Female owned supplier.
I agree with the SM team on this topic, the label “minority supplier” does not inspire one either.
I have come across this in tender documentation from a US company where there was a clause grouping Women Owned Enterprises with Small and Disadvantaged Enterprises. Of course all suppliers should be treated equally but clearly some of these organisations may be able to carry out the work required but may not meet some of the criteria that can be prerequisites in tenders. If this enables them to compete for work they are able to perform that is a good thing. There are a number of small suppliers that are able to provide goods and services to companies but they in no way meet the requirements of increasingly complex tender documentation that is often produced irrespective of the value of goods being procured or the cost/resource to organisations in completing documentation.It may be patronising but is probably favourable to buyers as it broadens their choice of suppliers provided they can manage the risks associated with smaller suppliers.