 Thank you very much, very flattering comments. And I'm very glad to be here today, and I'm very glad to be after Professor Scott's speech. I've been reading his books for a long time. And it's something that I've been often thinking, and I was thinking while he was speaking, imagine you are having the interview of the job of your dream. And they tell you, well, I guess you feed the profile, and we hire you because you are a woman. How do you feel about it? Not so good, huh? Why? Because what if instead of that, they tell you, actually I love your ideas. I really think your ideas can contribute. I will be giving you the job because of your thoughts and your ideas. We will feel much better, right? Because we don't wanna share our sameness. We wanna share our uniqueness. And it was all what Scott was talking about. We are all having all sorts of identities. I mean, I'm very glad to be a woman, and don't deny it is part of my identity. The same thing, I don't know, if they give me the job because the recruiter loves Real Madrid, and then you say you are from Madrid, therefore the job is for you. I would say, okay, fine, I will not be offended, but I would say they're a little bit silly in this company, right? But that's okay, I'm from Madrid. I share that identity with others. I'm a woman, I share that identity with half of the humanity. But I want to be me. My uniqueness is what I want to put into the board. So if this is the end, if this is the aspiration, as Professor Scott was telling, I'm not gonna talk a little bit about the origins, this identity of origin, and why this may cause some barriers to getting to being perceived with our ideas, not with our original identity. This is what we will be talking a little bit today. And afterwards, in the discussion, we then can bring all these ideas why how can organizations help from my legacy of identities, being a woman, being Spanish, being this and that, and how they can help me getting to contribute to my best, to my uniqueness, into a group. Because at the end, this is what we all want to contribute with our difference into a common project. And this is the journey we'll try to see a little bit why these, some of our identities in the professional world create some barriers and how this can be eliminated by the organizations. So when we're talking about women, if we see like that's the first thing, what is the picture we have. And interestingly enough, if you have like the last report of the global gender gap, number one in gender parity is Iceland. It's kind of normal, right? That's what we think. Iceland are gooding. Number 137, there is like about 160 blankets. That's, okay, Morocco, yes. I can kind of imagine. We have Spain about 29. That kind of like gives us a little hope with all the world wars. Now, what do you think the United Kingdom? What do you think? It will be higher or lower than Spain? Where's your guess? Who thinks it's higher? Who thinks it's lower? Actually, it's higher. Now, what about the United States? Is it higher than the United Kingdom? Who thinks it's higher than the United Kingdom, United States? Couple of Americans, I guess, no. Who thinks it's lower? Yeah? Surprised me, yeah? Even lower than Spain. We were so happy to see that. Now, who do you think is number 10? I gave you like three choices. American, European, Asia? Who do you think it will be European, number 10? Who do you think it will be Latin American? Where are you from? Okay. Who do you think is Asian country? Nicaragua. Yeah? Because when we're thinking about gender equality, we tend to think about economic development, but it's not economic development. Obviously, there will be like more work opportunities in the United States for both women and men than in Nicaragua. But the equality of participation of women and men in politics and economics and in the society in general is nothing to do with economic development. It's just the fact that there is an equal level of opportunity in society. And whenever we study women issues, we always find Colombia, Nicaragua, Honduras at the very top, much higher than in the United States and other countries. So that's what we'll have to think differently. We don't have to think about development. We'll have to think what is it going on in the culture? What is happening? Because at the end, what we try to answer is why there is so few women in top leadership positions all over the world, not only in certain countries. The second question we normally ask whenever we talk about gender is what is this a problem? What we care about? If there is no woman, well, perhaps I don't want to be. My first job, it was in a bank, I would not say the name, not in the bank I was working in. My first, let's say, consultant job. They say, oh, no, we don't have a diversity problem. They never normally have in organizations. But, and I say, how many women do you have in the top leadership? They say, no, 95% of them were secretaries. They say, if they want to be secretaries and they don't want to be top managers, this is not my fault. And I say, okay, perhaps this is the, what is this a problem? If they don't want to be on the top, and we'll talk about, do women want to be in the top or not? And who is a problem for? For the women themselves, for the organizations, for the society, who perceive this being a problem? And the last one is what can the organizations do? So in order to answer these three questions, I would like to go back to the very, very past. If Scott was going to the future, allow me to go to the past because, I think it was Kafka who said, human beings, we are always struggling with two contradictory forces. One is the past that is pushing to maintain itself in the present. And the other one is the future who pushes back in order to emerge in the present as well. So Kafka was saying the only duty of human beings is to be in the present struggling, reconciliating ourselves with our past in order to build our future. Because the idea that we can go ahead and cut with our past, it normally doesn't work because it's there in our unconscious, pushing, pushing. So we have all that ideas of women feeling guilty because they are bad mothers, because they don't do good, whatever. All these past models that we have in our unconscious, they're pushing to be on the present. So the only thing we can do is to try to accept whatever's in the past, reconciliate ourselves with that and with that legacy build the future. You cannot build the future without legacy, without solid pillars. So I think it's important to understand a little bit what has been going on in the gender issue in order to understand it, accept it and then move forward to the future. And this is what I tried to do in the first part of the conversation. Now, if we go back like before 10,000 years ago, it's not like men and women were happily in heaven, perhaps that was even before that, but I mean, talking about earth, they were not very happy, but they were both working outside the house. They were both trying to survive and looking for food outside the house. The first big split into the roles of gender happened in the 10,000 years agricultural revolution. While roles were split, woman will stay at home and men will go out to do the working in the land every day. Woman will normally work in the land, but only in the harvest team and in certain occasions. That was the first moment in which, because the whole debate, whenever we talk about gender, is whether it is nature or nature, whether it's something that happened because we are having different brains or because we're having different education. To me, this is not really at the date because 10,000 years of education or having a different brain to me doesn't make really a difference because there is quite a lot of years of education into separating the roles. So at that time, then woman stays home, men get out of the house to work and there is a second moment in history where the separation was very important as well. If in the first one it was the roles, the second big separation happened with the enlightenment. If you remember the century of the enlightenment with the encyclopedia, the French encyclopedia, and all that is when the roles were split into reason and intuition. I don't know, this is getting a little bit into philosophy, but if you ever like Greek philosophy, there is like in the mind there were two concrete functions. One it was nose and the other one was the eye and eye. In any case, one it was intuition and the other one was reason. Both were functions of the mind, both were equally important. But in the enlightenment, you needed, it was a scientific reason. You needed the concrete reasonable mind to discover scientific findings. Let me give you an example to understand it better. If you understand music, you were talking before about musicologies, I don't know if you already have a star of higher musicologies at the bank, if any of you are, but up to 17th century, there were many women musicians, many. From seventh century on, you would not find any woman composer. Why? Because at the 17th century, music became mathematical music. It was reasons, it was a mathematical pudding of the notes and distribution. And from the 17th century on, women were left out of the world of music. However, she was very present in the folkloric music, in the music of Flamenco, Arabic, whatever. But in this century of the reason, you didn't want it to intuition, to affect reason. So intuition became increasingly emotional thing. So woman, the qualities of woman, not of woman, the qualities of the feminine. And we will be talking afterwards the difference between the feminine and the masculine and woman, concrete woman and concrete man. But the qualities of the feminine, that there were more intuition, that it was something guiding the science, or something validating the science after the science, became irrelevant or became in a second class. It was only, let's say, men's qualities, masculine qualities, not feminine qualities that were at the forefront. And if you remember the Encyclopedia, any of you have read the French Encyclopedia of the 17th century? No, come on. I've heard people here were hired by their intelligence. And in any case, it was important for our society because it was the contract between the individual and the state. It was when we became citizens of a country. And the citizenship contract, it was only with men. Women were only citizens as long as they belonged to a household, a family. So women were not considered because they were not rational, they say in the Encyclopedia. They were not rational enough to be an individual citizen. So they have to be belonging to the citizenship of a household. She's too emotional, too intuitive. This will be affecting our new discovering world. I mean, this is not to blame anybody. That's how society evolves. You have to evolve like that. We need to get out of religious or intuition of witchcraft. And that's what it was a century of scientific reason. And they have to push everything back to that. So what happened? We get into the 19th century with the roles split and with the qualities split. Women have the role of being in the house with the qualities of the feminine, being nurturing, helping, nurturing relational type of things. Men were outside the house with the qualities of the masculine, rational, direct provider. And I love this sentence of Virginia Wolf. You know who was Virginia Wolf, right? If you read, you don't read encyclopedia, at least you read Virginia Wolf. But she has this beautiful little book that I think in every feminist course will have to be told, a room of her own. And she was just thinking about what happened with the genders. So he was walking in London, Victorian London, and he saw this library. You know, the Victorian Times, libraries in London, they were only for men. So she was like very angry, say, where can I get in, what I cannot get in? You know these men, they don't accept me. They're also having their libraries and I'm here outside. And then she started thinking and saying, well, it's not so easy to be in a man anyway. They have to show up, they have to be always the best. They have to be successful. They have to always provide with more and more money. And she kept on thinking and says, well, it's not such an easy thing to be a man. You have these roles that you have to fulfill. And you cannot escape from that either. So she ended up with the reflection saying, I don't know what it's worth to not to be allowed in or not to be allowed out. Because this is what happened in the 19th century. The roles were split and the qualities were split. If you were a male, you were not supposed to cry because sensitivity was a woman's thing, a feminine thing. If you were a woman, you were not supposed to be very, I don't know, aggressive because women have to know other places. And neither very intelligent or neither very whatever. But both will be suffering from the same, let's say, role composition. So you could be a man and be very sensitive, even I think exist, sensitive men. And you could be a woman and be very aggressive. You were Margaret Thatcher. You were not perceived by being very feminine qualities. But that was kind of an exception because you were put into a role. And your role, it was the home and the role of the male. It was to be the providers and to be the direct, the secure, et cetera. So what is happening in the 20th century? Woman break the rules and left the house. So the struggle in the woman in the 20th century it was she didn't drop the functions of her role. She didn't stop being the best mother, the best organizer of the house, the best whatever. She keep on having the feminine qualities but then she decided to break the rules and left the house and start working. However, men did not enter the house. So what are we finding today? Woman having all roles, the best mothers and the best executives. Males struggling trying to find what they're in this world for because they are no longer have this very concrete role for them. And that's why there is this inconsistency because we're in a very complicated transition in which women are incredibly stressed and feeling all sorts of guilt, problems. And men also are not very sure what is the role either. Why? Because we are still working in group roles, not individual roles. And this is part of the problem we are facing in because women as a group enter the professional life. We'll see how she enter. And the men still are playing for rematch with the functions and the roles of the 19th century except in the quality side. If you remember the executive courses over the last 10 years, getting touch with your emotions is probably one of the best. Have the sensitivities, emotional intelligence. So men finally can have these feminine qualities and be still very good executives. But the roles are a whole different story. But this is how it came to be. Now, how much, how we move into gender equality? Women that just decided to break the rules, get inside the house, and then enter the professional role. And we normally think it is a line. And the woman have to fulfill that it's like a beginning, an exit, I mean a final destination. I will have to reach there. But what the research shows is like a much, is a much more complicated thing because it is, has much more to do with a different map. A different map in which there is a series of external barriers and internal barriers. And each culture, its organization, and each individual person, it has a combination of both, external and internal barriers. And this is the difficulty to break it with. I used to do this, I'm gonna have a little bit of water. I used to do these workshops about woman barriers in different cultural cities. I used to do it in Senegal, Saudi Arabia, but also in Norway, London, and Madrid. And it was very interesting because you didn't say the word internal or external barriers, but for instance, you say, women are not getting into the top because in friendly legislation, because lack of opportunity, because of attitudes and behavior of the bosses, because of lack of motivation, but it's internal because of feeling insecure. And interestingly enough, in let's say more developing countries as Senegal or Saudi Arabia, the barriers were always external. And in European countries, the barriers were also internal, always. So for a London woman, the biggest problem for a woman in getting into the top, it was lack of motivation or insecurity. While in Senegal, it would be like more unfriendly legislation of lack of opportunity. Now when we put the solutions, now if this is like a problem, what is the kind of solutions it will put in order to solve this problem, it was the reverse. Woman in Senegal, Brazil or Saudi Arabia will say the solution is me, getting more education, getting into conferences all over the world, getting into that. And for European woman, although the problem was internal, the solution was always external. I want more mentoring, more flexibility, more the organization should give me this and that. So it's when we start realizing that the external impediments, once the organizations or the societies break with the external issues, internal issues emerge. They're normally uncovered because it is more important consequences that you have on top, but when those disappear, the internal ones will appear. And this is what it causes so much problems in getting a very effective method for women development and societies because of this internal barriers that we normally have. And those internal are the consequence of all these 10 years, 10,000 years of education of these models that we have in which women they feel, tell you an anecdote, a friend of mine that he was a coach for couples and then they have like, this couple and the woman were saying, I'm gonna have to, I mean I cannot take it anymore, I don't have opportunities, my boss is impossible and I have like all these problems at work, I leave everything and I stay at home with my kids. And then my friend asked the husband, aren't you tired of doing your job? He said, oh, if I can, I cannot even start telling you, but for him it was never a choice to drop. For her it was always like, I'm gonna be leaving my kids alone while being at work, perhaps I should do that. So this is the idea that it brought us into this research we've been conducting for the last year and a half. It was the generation gap problem. What we tried to analyze is all these gaps between the past models that we have in our unconscious and the aspirational ideas we have about ourselves as a group. And what is the tensions created by that? Because if I have in my unconscious, like I have to be the best model and then I spent 24 hours working, so the tension that creates between the two models is gonna be too huge for me. So at the end, I ended up dropping or I ended up going back to a traditional model. And this is the kind of, and we don't try to do it only for women, also for men, because again, if a man don't think that they have a role to fulfill inside the house, they have certain qualities to fulfill that may match the qualities they have, we're never gonna find a balance. We will still working as men or as women. And we will still like moving as a group. I don't know, we did also in this research, we're trying to see by age. Now, there is a new generation of women, very, very young ones, like, I don't know, the ones in their late 20s who are shifting big way into the traditional models. For them, motherhood is becoming like the goal to achieve. And I'm beginning to find many young ladies living into a small little town doing mermilates while their husbands are going to the town to work. Why? Because that model of having it all, a struggling for having it all, a newer generation, they say, I have to choose one or the other. Why? Because we are still thinking as a group of women because of the peer pressure we have outside, because of the, this will be a whole different issue that is nothing to do with here, but it's a very similar approach that happened in the Muslim world with women of my generation dressing as Westerners and their daughters putting the veil on. They move traditionally all as a group. And this is because the past has captured up and we have not dealing with them and deal it individually with it in order to move forward. So what we try to do that is in the professional and personal dimensions, what is the gender expectations? Are society expecting something from me as being a woman? I mean, I don't have children and sometimes I have to make it up stories because when I go to a gender conference and I don't have children, I feel bad. I feel I have to excuse myself. So even one time we were in a small circle of researchers into a cruiser, so I didn't want it to feel rejected. So they asked me, do you have children? And then I start like making it up that when I was a child, my father gave me these medicaments so I became unfortunate. I feel so sorry for myself that I started like crying and then everybody started like hugging me. And yeah, because I feel like a failure if I didn't have children. So because as a woman, although we were in a conference about researchers doing research on women, I felt I had the pressure, my success, was very much related to being like an accepted woman in all aspects. My male colleagues never had such a problem. When I was working in the bank, it was also like more traditional times, but I got often from clients when they say, are you married? And I would say, no, I say, don't worry, you're pretty. You will find somebody. I say, come on, you're a client. I mean, what am I supposed to react to that? Why? Because the personal issues in the womanhood became professional. And same thing, I mean, how many males do you know that they will openly say into their peers? I don't know because my woman is making so much money, they started to take care of the kids and stay home. That's gonna be difficult for center rush, for going back to work, going to an interview and say what you did in the last five years, oh, I was taking care of my kids. You're not gonna be having big chances of getting a promotion afterwards. So all this like professional, like gender expectations about you as a human, professional and personal had a lot to do with the gaps of what is what the past is expecting from you and what is your personal idea of what you're thinking about in the future. And these create tensions. And that's why all these women are fit guilty because another anecdote, which is anybody here is Canadian? Well, is King Campbell used to be the president of Canada and she was very much into women issues. So one time she was telling us that they have a crisis. So there were like 10 at night, all her ministers with her and they were trying to solve that crisis. And suddenly she says, forgot to take the meat out of the freezer. Where are we gonna be having dinner for tonight? I said, I'm the president of this country. I'm the most important person here. What do I have to take care about the logistics of food making in the house? It says it's not a question of money, it's not a question of aid. I mean, I have like a cleaning lady, I have many, but the responsibility of what we're gonna have for dinner tonight is mine. And this is the kind of past getting clashing into the present. So why do I have as responsibility embedded in my genetic genes that my responsibility of food taking care is mine? I think this is the kind of tensions that creates that for many women at some point where they have children that have to struggle with all with an idiot boss that doesn't allow them and opportunities at the end they save give up. You still have external barriers. I don't know, I don't deny them, but these internal ones at some point, they're also very important. Also for the men. Because many of them, some of the ones you're here that are smile probably will be very happy staying for a couple of years at home and then going back to work and nothing happened. You still have opportunities because you're recognized for being fatherhood. And you cannot do it. So this is because if that happened and this is of course in the way we understand success in the way we understand journey, personal and professional because we normally say may like from 30 to 40 is when they really have to struggle. Take every opportunity, travel, go to China if there is an opportunity. But women from 30 to 40 is when either they're having a starting a family or they're thinking, oh my God, it's gonna be too late. I should have started beginning to do that now. And so they tend to be much more shifting. So the journey when they're 40 and they're ready to take many opportunities, the market say no, it's too late now. So they have like different journeys. Personal and professional as well. Many men probably this is not very politically correct but after 40 they find a different family. Find a new wife, younger, new set of kids and this is suddenly at 55 there are the best fathers that the first wives wish they ever were when they were in the 30s. Again, they lose that opportunity and the same way women want to go at 40 and have like a new career beginning. Probably many men that would like to be at 50 with a new small little kids who are in the house and they spend time with them. We need to understand journeys and in order to make the market because they are different. Sinking for leadership and as my husband was saying like all this idea of leadership, you've been tough or you've been nurturing or you've been and who is the leader in the house who is the leader in the professional household. This is also to do. Sinking with competencies. Emotional intelligence became suddenly within of the 80s and 90s. And then everyone was forced to take courses on being emotional. Well, many women we already know what is to be emotional. We don't need to be taught more on that. Probably be more mathematical minds. Probably will help us more. So whatever competencies became the fashion is not necessarily the same for men and women. Intuition as I was saying before is not a quality of the heart, it's a quality of the mind. But intuition need to be filled with knowledge. Otherwise intuition is the relational. You know more about intelligence, but it's more like the relational intelligence. I connect dots. This is intuition. I connect many different areas from many different places. If I have knowledge, then I get into like very many good profound ideas. If not, my intuition is gonna say oh, this one is gonna take your husband from you and this one is getting after your money and this is relational intelligence but used for nothing. You need to fill it up with knowledge. Same thing with the rational minds. I mean a mathematical mind only doing models is good for doing models. But then you will need somebody else to try to understand what those models are good for. So this combination of intelligence is what we need. Not just one or the other. And so some of the research findings, I mean we're just in the first part of the research and now we're developing a tool, a digital tool. IBM is helping us with that. We have like some funding from some foundations and some companies. So it's a digital tool in order to say what is the level of gap and tension in those five different dimensions. So then it will be like this personality MBT test but making it to the gender gap tool. So then we will be figuring out men, women, no. Yeah, men, women, different ages and different cultures what is the level of gap between the traditional models and the aspirational models. And that will help us making a diagnosis. That will help us then to provide tools, courses, mentoring, whatever is needed to the different needs. But no woman need the same, no role executive need the same. So the findings of the research is like we all have an idea of a traditional cultural model in our shoulders. We all know. Like women have to be nurturing, good mothers, caring, this and that. And we'll have an idea that these models are changing into something different. Like the question is, is a normative model emerging? It's a woman before they have to be mothers, then they have to be executives and now have to be everything and I have to go back and do the mermilate. It's like society tell me as a woman what I have to do. Or there will be my own choice. And this is the whole, so the traditional models are very easy to identify for most people. Now the emerging ones are not so easily to identify because, and this is the good thing about it, we no longer have to be behaving as women or men. It's a great diversity in the aspirational models we would like to have. And this is the map we're selling. It's not a line of equality we begin here, we have to end there. Each combination of external, internal barriers and aspirations will allow us to have a map in which women and men will be positioned whatever. So whenever then somebody's born woman or man, you will no longer have a normative generic expectations from society. But then if there is a number of men that who decided to stay home, fulfill different obligations, having different qualities, then being a woman will not equal to being anything. And then things will be more normalized because it will be more woman everywhere and there will be more men everywhere. And then we all will have to fulfill our own aspirational models. And to end, so more or less on time, where there's a few women in leadership positions. I think women have been only for 100 years working really. And there have been like 10,000 years of specialization that it has more or less break the rule. So it is kind of a normal journey that women have to have. And still women have so much on their backs on their shoulders for the normative expectations that have to fulfill as a woman that they make very many external and internal barriers for them to really achieve the top leadership positions. Is this a problem? Yes, because if you are a woman and you don't want to be any particular thing because of being woman, there is, as you know in identity, there is two ways. One is, do I identify with a group and whatever supposed to be that group? Or I am categorized by the others into the womanhood. So I have two problems. First as a woman, I have this past that says I have to be the best mother, I have to be this and that. And then society looks at me at the working environment and they have to see you have to be as a woman. This is the categorization. So if we're still like a categorized woman by what they are and many women still identify what they are supposed to be, then at the end is a problem because complexity in today's world, as Professor Scott was saying, is too much. So we cannot afford not to have every member of the society working in the complexity of times that we're having in. So of course it's a problem because the world is not anymore so simple that we can divide the sexes. Nice complex and we need all and all minds to solve the complex problems. What can organizations do? I think many of the things you do here that you explained before, you can eliminate external barriers. But it's very difficult that you can eliminate the internal ones. You can allow women and men to identify their own internal barriers but you can only eliminate them. It's a question of personal choice. But what organizations can do and another thing they do enough is to work with men, not to help women, to help men themselves. Because the more men became comprehensive beings with their personal and professional and different duties fulfilled, the more men, you help men getting into the house and fulfill the house duties and happiness and obligations, the more women will be liberated. So if men don't find, I mean in the 20th century was the liberation of women getting into the workplace. 21st century have to be the liberation of men getting into the house. If not, things will be compensated and we will not manage to get equality. And I think that that would be all that I wanted to share with you. Thank you. If you want any questions or anything. Thank you.