I find this a little frustrating, they’ve noticed a pattern of behaviour that concerns them in an area they are clearly invested in - yet they have no thoughts or suggestions on how to address this? Is it possible they are not offering such thoughts because of the same issue they have highlighted in the article?
Maybe the problem is real but they just don’t have as solution?
Yes, the observation's valid, but... I don't know. When the conversation keeps happening the same way, over may topics, you have to figure there's something deeper going on.
Furthermore, isn't this an issue of long-standing that for some reason is still a big enough problem to raise complaints? How many decades have there been women in upper-management, let alone the C-suite? Why aren't VCs, people who are rumored to be good at analyzing businesses across their field of expertise, already aware of this weakness? Is rooting out inefficiencies only for the businesses in which they invest?
This is to say, why is this essay still necessary? I'd say it's because many men are trying to keep the old world going. Status quo.
I suggest that a VC who can't have the conversation about swapping for CEO in both "directions," who is aggrieved about the present state of business demographics enough to clam up in fear of raising controversy, is not a competent investor.
This is a Continuing Education topic for those who need it, just like RNs have to take a certain number of class-hours each year to stay up on current techniques and technologies. This essay is about and aimed at guys who don't think that their attitudes toward women need changing.
1. Criticism is fast and easy compared to thinking up a solution; building the solution; trying to show a solution works; etc. Criticism has the benefit that it can be directed to any sub-part and does not have to, necessarily, take in (or understand) the whole.
2. Criticism is, generally, perceived as "socially safer" than creation. For example, it's easier to say "I don't like X or Y about something" than it is to say "I think that X or Y should be changed to A or B." Proposing the change exposes one to criticism.
3. Criticism, in many ways (thinking of many college courses here), is what folks are often trained in as compared to creation. I think an outcome is that we learn to "see" faults more than we learn to "see" solutions. To be clear, I think folks learn to create in their vocation, but outside of that, necessarily, limited sphere, folks are most often trained as critics, rather than creators.
Thinking of _just one_ potential solution would be evidence that they are acting in good-faith.
3 is interesting though.