France Dequilbec – Female Executive Search https://www.female-executive-search.com International Female Executive Search and Interim management Thu, 20 Aug 2026 03:59:21 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.3 https://i0.wp.com/www.female-executive-search.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-FES_glass-1.png?fit=32%2C32&ssl=1 France Dequilbec – Female Executive Search https://www.female-executive-search.com 32 32 187674157 Present, But Not in Power: What the 2026 Data Says About Women in the C-Suite https://www.female-executive-search.com/insights/insights-women-executives-c-suite-power-distribution-2026/ Fri, 07 Aug 2026 15:19:35 +0000 https://www.female-executive-search.com/?p=12015 Published August 2026. Statistical references current as of the date of publication.

There is a version of the gender-balance story that gets told every summer, and by now most boards can recite it: progress on boards, stagnation below. It is true, and I have written about it myself. But it has become slightly too comfortable. It lets a company conclude that the problem is a number, and that the number is going up.

Spend an hour with the 2026 data and a different picture emerges. The problem is not that there are too few women in the C-suite. It is that the women who are there are sitting in a specific and predictable set of chairs — and almost none of those chairs lead anywhere.

Where women in the C-suite actually sit

The World Economic Forum’s Closing the Gender Gap in Senior Leadership, published in June 2026 with data from the LinkedIn Economic Graph Research Institute, puts women at 24.6% of C-suite roles globally. That is a real quarter, and a decade ago it was meaningfully lower.

Then it breaks the quarter apart.

Women hold around two-thirds of chief human resources officer and chief people officer roles. They hold just under half of chief marketing officer roles. And then the floor drops. They hold roughly a quarter of CFO and COO positions. Fewer than one in five chief information officer roles. And 8.6% of chief technology officer roles.

At the very top, women hold 19.1% of CEO positions in the same dataset.

In Europe the pattern is sharper still. The European Institute for Gender Equality, which monitors the largest listed companies in every member state, found that as of October 2025 women held 18.5% of executive director positions across the EU — up from 16.2% three years earlier, but still leaving men in more than eight of every ten of those seats. EIGE’s director, speaking in Brussels in June 2026, put the endpoint plainly: women are just over 10% of board chairs and just under 10% of CEOs. Meanwhile, women had reached just under 40% of non-executive director roles, and around a third of all board seats.

Read those two paragraphs together and the shape of the thing is unmistakable. The closer a role sits to capital, operations and technology, the fewer women are in it. The further a role sits from those things, the more.

Women in the C-suite by function in 2026, from 66% of CHRO roles to 8.6% of CTO roles

Why the distribution is the whole story

This matters because C-suite roles are not interchangeable, and boards know it. The route to a CEO appointment runs, overwhelmingly, through the CFO and COO seats — the roles with direct line of sight to revenue, cost and enterprise performance. The WEF report makes the point directly: pathways to the top remain anchored in exactly the two functions where women hold less than a third of positions.

So a company can raise its C-suite to 25% women, publish the figure, and still have structurally no internal woman candidate for CEO. Not because of a hiring failure at the top, but because of a composition failure one level down. The headline number is satisfied. The succession slate is not.

This is also why the flow data has stopped moving. LinkedIn’s hiring figures show the share of women among new C-suite hires rising from 20.2% in 2015 to 26.6% in 2022 — and then flattening at around 27% ever since. The CEO-specific figure tells the same story with more precision: women were 15.3% of CEO hires in 2015, 20.1% in 2022, and 21.1% in 2025. The annualised rate of improvement fell from 3.9% to 1.7%. The CTO figure rose to 9% by 2022 and has essentially sat there — a number worth holding in mind next to the women executives working in IT and technology leadership who are already operating at that level and are simply not being appointed at it.

A plateau in the flow, three years long, is not noise. It is the system finding its resting state.

The one place the numbers are moving

There is a genuine bright spot, and it is worth being precise about it because it is easy to over-read.

Challenger, Gray & Christmas, which has tracked US CEO departures since 2002, reported that through the first half of 2026 women accounted for 27.5% of new CEO appointments — up from 25.4% in the same period of 2025, and running ahead of last year’s full-year rate. This is happening in a market where boards are replacing CEOs far less often: 920 exits in the first half of 2026, down 26% year on year, with retirement the leading stated reason.

So: fewer CEO seats changing hands, and women taking a larger share of the ones that do. That is a better ratio operating on a smaller base. In the United States, Fortune’s 2026 list put 55 women at the head of Fortune 500 companies — 11%, the fourth consecutive year above ten. Globally, the 2026 Fortune Global 500 recorded 34 women CEOs, or 6.8%.

Improving flow, stubborn stock. The two can coexist for years.

What this changes for a board

If the constraint is functional rather than numerical, then three of the standard responses stop being useful.

Counting stops being sufficient

A single C-suite percentage conceals precisely the information a nomination committee needs. The number that matters is the share of women in P&L-owning and technology-owning roles, reported separately.

“There aren’t enough candidates” stops being credible

There are a great many women executives with CHRO, CMO, communications and legal backgrounds, because that is where organisations have been placing them. The scarcity is in the roles organisations have not been placing them in — which is a consequence of prior decisions, not a fact about the talent market. This is also the easiest claim to test rather than assume: filtering our Female Executive Search Engine by function, sector and geography takes a few minutes and settles the question in either direction, and the profiles it returns are around half of what is actually in the vetted pool.

Board appointment stops being a substitute

Europe is close to its non-executive targets. It is not close on executive directors. Appointing a woman to a board seat is a governance improvement — and board-level search is worth doing well — but it does not build an operating pipeline, and treating it as though it does is how a company arrives at 2029 with excellent disclosure and no internal successor.

The honest version

I have spent twenty-five years placing women into senior roles, and the change I have watched over the last decade is real. Women are in the room now in a way they were not. What has not changed at anything like the same rate is which room, and what that room decides.

The next phase of this work is narrower and less celebratory than the last one. It is about who gets the transformation mandate, the manufacturing footprint, the P&L, the technology function — the assignments that are difficult, measurable, and career-defining. Those are the appointments that will determine the 2032 numbers. They are being made now, and mostly quietly. When one of them is an external appointment, the search brief is where the decision is really made.

That is where I would suggest boards look this year. Not at the total.

If you are mapping succession for a P&L or technology role, you can talk to us about a search mandate or browse the search engine first.

Related reading

Sources

  1. World Economic Forum, Closing the Gender Gap in Senior Leadership, June 2026 — weforum.org
  2. World Economic Forum, “Gender parity in senior leadership: progress at a turning point”, 18 June 2026 — weforum.org
  3. European Institute for Gender Equality, Gender balance in business and finance 2025 (data to October 2025) — eige.europa.eu
  4. European Institute for Gender Equality, Director’s keynote, Brussels, 11 June 2026 — eige.europa.eu
  5. Challenger, Gray & Christmas, June CEO Turnover Report, 2026 — challengergray.com
  6. Fortune, “Women run a record 11% of Fortune 500 companies in 2026”, 3 June 2026 — fortune.com

]]> 12015 After 30 June: the board gender-balance deadlines still to come (2026–2029) https://www.female-executive-search.com/women-in-leadership/board-gender-balance-deadlines-2026-2029/ Thu, 23 Jul 2026 06:32:58 +0000 https://www.female-executive-search.com/?p=11850

The 30 June 2026 milestone has been analysed at length — including what non-compliant companies must do now under the EU Women on Boards Directive. But treating that date as the finish line is the most expensive mistake a board can make this year: the regulatory calendar for gender balance at the top runs to 2029 and beyond, and several of the hardest deadlines are still ahead. This is the forward map — every date now in force or approaching across eight jurisdictions — and what it means for search planning.

The calendar ahead, country by country

  • EU-wide — the reporting cycle begins: the Directive now shifts into rhythm — annual reporting on board composition, published national compliance lists, and for companies below target, appointments run on pre-determined, gender-neutral criteria with a comparative assessment. The first reporting round will name names; the recurring question for every AGM season is who appears on which list.
  • Norway: the June 2026 step (all 30+ employee companies) is done; the next two are not — companies above NOK 70m revenue by 30 June 2027, and NOK 50m by 1 July 2028, ultimately covering ~20,000 companies. Sanctions escalate from invalid board decisions and rejected registrations to compulsory dissolution — and the government estimates roughly 13,000 new board members are needed by 2028, most of them women. Norway is, structurally, in a permanent board-search cycle.
  • France: the big one is ahead: the Rixain law’s 40% floor for executive bodies and senior executives arrives in March 2029 — and with about a third of declaring companies still short of today’s 30%, three annual Egapro declarations stand between now and a penalty of up to 1% of payroll.
  • Germany: 30% supervisory-board quota under FüPoG, enforced by the ’empty chair’ rule — a breaching election is void and the seat stays empty.
  • Netherlands: one third of listed supervisory boards under the ingroeiquota; a non-compliant appointment is null by operation of law, and ~5,500 large companies file targets with the SER.
  • Belgium: the quiet pioneer — one third of listed boards since 2011, with suspended director benefits for persistent breach.
  • Italy: two fifths of listed boards under Golfo-Mosca for six consecutive terms — and the EU’s strictest sanction chain, escalating through Consob fines to forfeiture of the entire board.
  • USA: the outlier: California’s quota struck down, Nasdaq’s disclosure rule vacated in late 2024 — yet MSCI and Deloitte data show US large-cap boards continuing to add women, because proxy votes and investor engagement now do what statutes cannot.
Empty board seat awaiting a qualified woman candidate

How the seats are actually getting filled

The uncomfortable arithmetic: the visible pool of women already serving on boards is small and over-solicited — every listed company in Europe is calling the same names this year. What is changing on the ground is the sourcing model. Nomination committees under deadline are shifting from network-based retained search to pre-vetted standing pools that can produce a documented shortlist in 7–10 days (Female Executive Search’s community of 5,000+ vetted female executives, within CEO Worldwide’s 28,000-strong network across 183 countries, is one example of the model — you can browse the pool by role, sector and country.), and from purely domestic slates to international ones — sitting CFOs, COOs and general counsel abroad who have never been approached for a home-market board seat. The same shift satisfies the Directive’s transparency mechanics: written criteria and a comparative file are natural by-products of a structured pool search, and increasingly the board’s best legal protection.

Frequently asked questions

What happens to EU companies that missed the 30 June 2026 target?

They keep operating — but every future board appointment must run on pre-determined, gender-neutral criteria with a documented comparison, reported annually, with member-state penalties up to fines and annulled appointments.

How quickly can a board realistically obtain a compliant shortlist of women candidates?

With specialist pre-vetted pools, 7–10 days to a referenced shortlist with a comparative assessment is now the working benchmark.

Sources

Related reading

This analysis was prepared by the research team at Female Executive Search, the women-leadership practice of CEO Worldwide (est. 2001), which maintains a vetted community of senior women executives across 183 countries. Country briefings:
France · Germany · Belgium · Netherlands · Italy · Norway · USA

]]> 11850 The retainer question: how regulatory deadlines are rewriting executive search economics in Europe https://www.female-executive-search.com/insights/retainer-question-executive-search-economics-europe/ Mon, 13 Jul 2026 10:51:49 +0000 https://www.female-executive-search.com/?p=11759 For fifty years, senior executive search in Europe has run on one commercial architecture: the retainer — a negotiated percentage of first-year compensation, typically billed to the calendar in monthly thirds whether or not candidates have been delivered, exclusivity throughout, three to six months end to end. That architecture assumed the client’s clock was flexible. In 2026, across most of Europe’s major economies, it is not: the clock is regulatory, and it is redistributing power between clients and search firms.

Seven clocks

Consider what boards are now scheduling against. In France, executive bodies must reach 40% of each sex by March 2029 — in a 12-person Comex, arithmetic says most upcoming appointments must go to women. Germany’s void-election rule and the Dutch nullity sanction mean a mis-run appointment does not merely embarrass, it legally fails. Belgium and Italy tie quotas to renewal cycles, making every AGM season a deadline. Norway is phasing ~20,000 private companies into its 40% regime by July 2028 — needing thousands of new women board members on a legislated timetable. Even the USA, with no statute, runs on the hardest deadline of all: proxy season, every year.

A six-month retained search fits none of these calendars. And clients have noticed the misalignment at the heart of the model: the retainer pays for process, not outcome.

Time versus cost in executive search fee structures

The alternative model — and why it can afford to exist

The challenger model re-anchors the economics: a fixed, published rate instead of a negotiated one, instalments triggered by delivered milestones — shortlist in hand, candidate in the seat — rather than by the calendar, no exclusivity, and shortlists in 7–10 days. The speed and the pricing come from the same structural choice: vetting is done continuously, on a standing pool, before any mandate exists, so the marginal search is a matching exercise rather than a discovery project. (Female Executive Search has run this model since its parent CEO Worldwide’s founding in 2001, with a vetted community now spanning 183 countries.) The honest caveat: milestone models fit defined seats with deadlines — a quota-driven board appointment, a sudden CFO exit, an interim bridge. Multi-year succession advisory remains natural retained territory. The practical consequence of no-exclusivity is more interesting than the fee itself: a board can run both models on the same live mandate and let delivery decide — the cheapest due diligence available in executive search.

Frequently asked questions

How can a search firm work without a retainer?

By front-loading its costs into continuous vetting of a standing candidate pool instead of billing discovery to each client — payment then follows delivery milestones.

Is a 7–10 day shortlist compatible with a compliant, documented process?

Yes — written criteria and a comparative assessment are natural outputs of a structured pool search; speed comes from pre-vetting, not from skipped steps.

Sources

Related reading


]]> 11759 Who finds the women leaders? Inside the executive search market for female C-level and board talent https://www.female-executive-search.com/insights/executive-search-women-c-level-board/ https://www.female-executive-search.com/insights/executive-search-women-c-level-board/#comments Fri, 10 Jul 2026 14:13:24 +0000 https://www.female-executive-search.com/?p=11735 Somewhere between the EU’s Women on Boards Directive deadline in June and Norway’s decision to extend its 40% board quota to some 20,000 private companies, a quiet market shift became visible: finding senior women executives has become a discipline of its own. Deloitte’s global Women in the Boardroom study still puts women at under a quarter of board seats worldwide — yet in quota markets the figure runs far higher, which tells you the constraint was never the talent. It was the search.

Three models, three different bets

The generalist diversity practice. Every large global firm — Spencer Stuart, Heidrick & Struggles, Egon Zehnder and peers — now runs a board-diversity practice. The strengths are brand and client intimacy; the structural weakness, documented for years in governance research, is pool overlap: the same visible, already-serving women directors receive most of the calls, which is how ‘we couldn’t find anyone’ and ‘she’s on five boards’ coexist.

The diversity boutique. Firms such as Audeliss in the UK and US specialise in diverse leadership broadly. High-touch, deep in their home markets, typically retained — a good fit when the mandate never crosses a border.

The specialist standing pool. The newest model inverts the process: executives are vetted — track record, references, availability — before any mandate exists, so a search becomes matching rather than discovery. Operated globally (Female Executive Search, for instance, runs a pre-vetted community of 5,000+ executives across 183 countries), this model now delivers shortlists in 7–10 days, without retainers — a timeline the classic retained process cannot structurally match.

Three models of executive search firms for women executives

Why geography decides which model you need

Seven major markets now regulate female representation at the top, and each defines the search differently. France has pushed past boards into the executive suite: the Rixain law requires 30% of each sex among senior executives and in executive committees of 1,000+ employee companies since March 2026 — and Ministry of Labour Egapro data shows roughly one declaring company in three still short. Germany enforces its 30% supervisory-board quota with the ’empty chair’ rule and requires women on large management boards under FüPoG II. The Netherlands voids non-compliant supervisory appointments outright. Belgium has run its one-third rule since 2011; Italy holds the EU’s highest listed-board bar at 40% under Consob’s watch. Norway — the original pioneer — extended 40% to private companies in five steps to 2028; the June 2026 step captured every company with more than 30 employees, and Norwegian counsel estimate ~13,000 new board members are needed by 2028, most of them women. The USA has no statute left standing — California’s quota was struck down, Nasdaq’s rule vacated in late 2024 — but proxy-voting policies at the major asset managers do the enforcing instead.

The pattern across all seven: the tighter the deadline and the harsher the sanction, the more the market rewards pre-vetted, cross-border pools over network-based search. National quotas, it turns out, are best answered internationally — each country’s own women running businesses abroad remain the largest pool domestic searches never reach.

Frequently asked questions

What types of firm specialise in placing women in C-level and board roles?

Three models: diversity practices of large generalist firms, national diversity boutiques, and global specialist pools such as Female Executive Search — the last built on pre-vetted communities that deliver shortlists in 7–10 days.

Are quotas shrinking the quality of boards?

The research points the other way: France’s decade under Copé-Zimmermann professionalised selection processes while taking boards past 40% women — quotas exposed how informally the bar was applied before.

Sources

Directive (EU) 2022/2381 (EUR-Lex); Deloitte, Women in the Boardroom (latest edition); French Ministry of Labour Egapro publications on the loi Rixain; FüPoG I/II (German Federal Ministry FSFJ summaries); Dutch ingroeiquota (SER Diversity Portal); Consob reports on Golfo-Mosca; Norwegian Companies Act amendments of Dec 2023 (e.g. DLA Piper / BDO Norway client briefings); US Fifth Circuit decision vacating the Nasdaq diversity rule (Dec 2024).

Related reading

]]> https://www.female-executive-search.com/insights/executive-search-women-c-level-board/feed/ 3 11735 After the Quota: Why Europe’s Most Regulated Markets Still Haven’t Built a Female CEO Pipeline https://www.female-executive-search.com/insights/female-ceo-pipeline-europe-after-board-quota/ Tue, 07 Jul 2026 17:38:38 +0000 https://www.female-executive-search.com/?p=11669 Europe’s gender diversity legislation is the most developed in the world. The EU Women on Boards Directive’s June 2026 deadline has now passed. France, Italy, Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden have between them produced decades of binding quotas, leadership position acts, comply-or-explain frameworks, and EU-level enforcement.

The board-level results are real. The female CEO pipeline is not.

As of July 2026, women run just 6.6% of Global 500 companies and 11% of Fortune 500 companies — figures that Fortune’s own analysis describes as stalling, not accelerating. In France — Europe’s most board-diverse market — no woman holds the combined chair-CEO role in the CAC 40. The gap between what regulation has produced and what governance requires is the defining challenge for corporate leadership in the post-quota era.

1. The Numbers in the Post-Quota Era

Three independent, non-competing sources published in 2025 and 2026 provide the clearest current picture of where female leadership stands in the C-suite roles that constitute the real CEO pipeline.

CEO representation

Fortune’s Global 500 data shows 33 female CEOs out of 500 companies in 2025 — 6.6%, a record high. Among Fortune 500 companies, women lead 55 businesses (11%). However, Fortune’s December 2025 analysis found that through October 2025, just 25.5% of new CEO appointments at US firms went to women — the lowest rate since 2020. By December 2025, the Fortune 500 had slipped back to 52 female CEOs as departures outpaced new appointments.

CFO representation — the critical feeder role

Crist Kolder Associates’ 2025 Volatility Report found women held 17.5% of Fortune 500 and S&P 500 CFO roles at mid-2025, down from 17.6% in 2024 and 18.5% in 2023. Women CFOs in the consumer sector dropped from 30 in 2023 to just 17 in 2025. Fortune’s own CFO tracking found 87 women (17.4%) in Fortune 500 CFO roles in 2025. The CFO role is the most direct feeder to CEO — its feminisation rate is falling, not rising.

The global executive picture

MSCI’s Women on Boards and Beyond 2025 report found that female representation among board chairs, CEOs, and CFOs shows signs of stagnation globally — a pattern MSCI notes may impact the pipeline for future female director candidates. Women hold 29% of C-suite roles globally — unchanged from 2024, unchanged for twelve months, across eleven consecutive years of McKinsey tracking.

“The board compliance chapter is largely written. The executive pipeline chapter has barely begun — and the data shows it moving in the wrong direction.”

2. What the Regulatory Record Has — and Hasn’t — Produced

What worked: Binding quotas with enforcement

Italy’s experience since 2011 is the most instructive. Research published in Management Science — examining 4,627 board member CVs at 245 Italian listed companies — found that quota introduction improved the overall quality of board appointments for both men and women. The competition effect — more qualified women entering the talent pool raising standards for all candidates — is the strongest evidence that diversity and quality are complementary goals.

France’s Copé-Zimmermann Law of 2011 took CAC 40 boards from under 10% to 46.7% female representation in fifteen years. Belgium’s mandatory quota with sanctions outperformed the Netherlands’ comply-or-explain approach — confirming that enforcement mechanisms matter more than targets alone.

What hasn’t worked: Voluntary measures and executive pipelines

Sweden and Denmark saw board diversity progress stall under voluntary measures, as documented by Bocconi University research (2024). Research published in Corporate Governance: An International Review (2024) identified the substitution effect across multiple markets: companies treat gender diversity as a board-level regulatory task, leaving executive tracks unchanged.

McKinsey’s 2025 Women in the Workplace report documents a new development: for the first time in eleven years, there is a measurable ambition gap, with 80% of women wanting promotion versus 86% of men. McKinsey attributes this not to changed individual preferences but to changed organisational signals: less support, fewer sponsorships, and a DEI retreat that is both real and measurable. One in six companies cut DEI staff or resources in 2025.

Female CEO leadership succession pipeline Europe board executive gender gap

3. Country-by-Country: The Pipeline Picture After the Deadline

France — The Most Advanced Board Market, the Same Executive Gap

France entered the post-quota era with 46.7% female CAC 40 board members. Yet no woman holds the combined chair-CEO role in the CAC 40, and less than 10% of SBF CEO positions are held by women. The Rixain Act of 2021 requires companies with over 1,000 employees to reach 30% women in senior executive roles by March 2026, rising to 40% by March 2030 — the governing framework for executive gender diversity in France beyond the board deadline.

Germany — The Opt-Out and Its Consequences

Germany exercised the EU directive’s opt-out in November 2024. Women hold just 4.4% of management board chair positions — unchanged since 2021. Without binding executive-level requirements, Germany’s executive gender gap is unlikely to close without deliberate organisational action.

Italy — The Competition Effect as a Pipeline Model

Italy’s fifteen years of quota experience have produced not just a more diverse board layer but a stronger executive pipeline. Research in Management Science found that new board members of both genders were more educated than those who departed. Italy’s listed companies now have a materially deeper pool of female executives with board experience.

Belgium and the Netherlands — Enforcement Active, Pipeline Questions Open

Both markets (Belgium, Netherlands) received formal EU infringement notices in January 2025. Board-level compliance is advancing — executive pipeline development in both markets remains substantially below board diversity levels and is not governed by binding targets.

Sweden — Binding Board Rules, Executive Gap Unchanged

Sweden’s binding board requirements are now active. But without explicit executive hiring targets and specialist search investment, the executive pipeline will not change.

United States — Retreating Regulation, Slowing Progress

The December 2024 Fifth Circuit ruling removed Nasdaq’s board diversity rules. Fortune’s December 2025 analysis found women’s progress in CEO appointments is slowing: 25.5% of new CEO appointments through October 2025, down from 26.4%. Crist Kolder data shows female CEO representation at Fortune 500 and S&P 500 companies fell to 9.1% in 2025, down from 9.7%, and female CFOs declined to 16.5%. For the US female executive pipeline, structural supports are weakening at precisely the moment they need to be strongest.

4. What Building a Genuine Female CEO Pipeline Requires in the Post-Quota Era

  • Explicit executive pipeline targets — tracked, reported, and accountable at board level — covering female representation at CFO, COO, divisional CEO, and CEO-1 levels. Crist Kolder data makes the mechanism clear: female CFO representation at 17.5% and falling will not produce female CEOs at scale without deliberate intervention in feeder roles
  • Active sponsorship — not mentoring. McKinsey 2025: just 31% of entry-level women have a sponsor versus 45% of men. Closing this gap at every level is the single most evidenced structural intervention available
  • Specialist executive search at every C-suite appointment — a process designed from the outset to find the best female candidate. The WEF (2023) documents that standard search processes systematically reduce diverse candidate pools through the law of small numbers
  • Non-linear career path recognition — outcome-based briefs that value what a leader has delivered over what titles they have held
  • Annual external market mapping of female CEO-ready executives — conducted proactively, not only when a vacancy arises. Fortune’s analysis of 2025 female Fortune 500 CEO appointments found all were internal promotions — evidence of the external market’s underdevelopment

5. The Search Firm’s Role in the Post-Quota Era

The board compliance question was answered through legislation. The executive pipeline question will be answered through thousands of individual hiring decisions — at CFO, COO, divisional CEO, and board level — each of which either builds or narrows the path for the female leader below.

The mechanism is documented in the data: the declining share of women in CFO roles is directly producing a declining share of women in CEO roles. The output changes only when the inputs change — and that starts with how executive searches are briefed, where they look, and who they present.

Female Executive Search, powered by CEO Worldwide, has been making those appointments exclusively since 2018, across the European and global markets where the post-quota pipeline challenge is now most urgent. The board chapter is written. We are working on the next one.

To discuss your executive succession pipeline and how we can help build it:
Visit www.female-executive-search.com or submit a mandate today.

Related reading

References & Sources

  1. Fortune (June 2025) — Women Run 11% of Fortune 500 in 2025. 55 of 500; nine new female CEOs, six departed; all new appointments were internal promotions.
    fortune.com
  2. Fortune (August 2025) — Global 500 Hits a Record High for Female CEOs. 33 of 500 Global 500 companies (6.6%) led by women.
    fortune.com
  3. Fortune (December 2025) — Why Women’s Rise to CEO Jobs and Board Seats Is Slowing. 25.5% of new US CEO appointments to women through October 2025; net gain only 47 Russell 3000 board seats vs 258 in 2024; 59% from board expansion not replacement.
    fortune.com
  4. Fortune (October 2025) — Fortune 500 Lost Two Women of Color CEOs. Fortune 500 fell from 55 to 52 female CEOs by end of 2025 — from 11% to 10.4%.
    fortune.com
  5. Fortune (June 2025) — Women Hold 17% of Fortune 500 CFO Roles. 87 women (17.4%) in 2025; 19 of top 100 Fortune 500 CFOs are women.
    fortune.com
  6. Crist Kolder Associates / CFO Dive (November 2025) — Is the Rise of Female CFOs Pausing — or Stalling Out? Women: 17.5% of Fortune 500/S&P 500 CFOs (June 2025); consumer women CFOs: 30 in 2023 → 17 in 2025.
    cfodive.com
  7. Crist Kolder Associates / CFO.com (February 2026) — CFO-to-CEO Promotions Reach Decade High. Female CEOs: 9.1% (down from 9.7%); female CFOs: 16.5% (down from 17.6%).
    cfo.com
  8. MSCI (March 2026) — Women on Boards and Beyond 2025. Female board chairs, CEOs, CFOs: signs of stagnation globally.
    msci.com
  9. McKinsey & Company / LeanIn.Org (December 2025) — Women in the Workplace 2025. C-suite: 29% unchanged. 93 women promoted per 100 men. First-ever ambition gap: 80% vs 86%. One in six companies cut DEI staff.
    mckinsey.com
  10. Glass Lewis (2025/2026) — Update on French Board Gender Diversity. CAC 40: 46.7%; no female chair-CEO; <10% female CEOs in SBF.
    glasslewis.com
  11. Linklaters Sustainable Futures (2025) — EU Transposition of Women on Boards Directive. Rixain Act: 30% March 2026, 40% March 2030.
    sustainablefutures.linklaters.com
  12. AllBright Foundation / DLA Piper (Autumn 2024) — Frankfurt Stock Exchange: 19.7% management boards, 37% supervisory, 4.4% management board chairs.
    dlapiper.com
  13. IEP at Bocconi University (2024) — Italy competition effect; Sweden and Denmark: voluntary measures stalling.
    iep.unibocconi.eu
  14. Wiley / Corporate Governance: An International Review (2024) — Lifting Women Up. Substitution effect: Germany most documented case.
    onlinelibrary.wiley.com
  15. CBRC / TU Graz (2025) — Belgium and Netherlands formal infringement notices January 2025.
    cbrc.sai.tugraz.at
  16. Altrata (2024) — Global Gender Diversity 2024. Women: 32% of Global 20 board members; 6.5% of CEOs globally.
    altrata.com
  17. World Economic Forum (2023) — Create an Executive Search Process That Promotes Diversity. Law of small numbers in executive search.
    weforum.org

Female Executive Search is powered by CEO Worldwide, the global executive recruitment group founded in 2001. Female Executive Search was launched in 2018 as a dedicated practice exclusively focused on placing female executives at C-suite and board level across four continents. Published July 2026.

]]> 11669 The Board Quota Is Met. The Executive Suite Is Not: Why Gender Diversity Must Now Go Further https://www.female-executive-search.com/insights/board-quota-met-executive-suite-gender-diversity/ Tue, 07 Jul 2026 17:32:49 +0000 https://www.female-executive-search.com/?p=11667

The EU Women on Boards Directive’s June 2026 deadline has passed. For many listed companies in France, Germany, Italy, and beyond, the 40% non-executive board target has been met — or is being actively pursued under enforcement. A significant compliance milestone.

But the data tells an uncomfortable story about what board compliance has and has not produced. At executive level — where strategy is set, culture is shaped, and tomorrow’s CEOs are made — gender diversity has barely moved. The board quota addressed the symptom. The executive pipeline remains largely untouched.

📥 The rules behind the quota side of this story, in one reference PDF: board gender quotas across 11 countries + the EU — thresholds, sanctions, deadlines — plus a five-question board readiness check that covers exactly the executive-pipeline questions this article raises — get the free Compliance Guide (PDF) →

1. The Board-Executive Gap: The 2025–2026 Picture

Three independent, non-competing sources published in 2025 and 2026 provide the clearest current picture of where female leadership stands in the C-suite roles that produce tomorrow’s CEOs.

Fortune’s tracking of the Fortune 500 and Global 500 shows that women now run 55 of 500 Fortune 500 companies — 11% — a milestone, but one that Fortune’s own December 2025 analysis describes as stalling. Women accounted for just 25.5% of new US CEO appointments through October 2025, down from 26.4% the prior year and the lowest rate since 2020. At the Global 500 level, just 6.6% of companies have a female CEO despite that being a record high.

Crist Kolder Associates’ 2025 Volatility Report — tracking Fortune 500 and S&P 500 appointments — shows women held 17.5% of CFO roles at mid-2025, down from 17.6% in 2024 and 18.5% in 2023. Women CFOs in the consumer sector dropped from 30 in 2023 to just 17 in 2025.

MSCI’s Women on Boards and Beyond 2025 report confirmed that female representation among board chairs, CEOs, and CFOs shows signs of stagnation globally — a pattern MSCI notes may impact the pipeline for future female director candidates.

At board level: women represent 32% of board members across Global 20 index companies — but just 6.5% of CEOs globally (Altrata, 2024). A board that is 40% female and a C-suite that is 6–11% female is not a diverse organisation. It is a compliant one.

“The board quota has been answered. The executive pipeline question has not. These are different problems requiring different tools.”

2. Why Board Compliance Has Not Produced Executive Diversity

The substitution effect

Research published in Corporate Governance: An International Review in 2024 identified the substitution effect: when companies focus on meeting board gender quotas, they often reduce pressure on executive diversity. Women enter non-executive positions to satisfy the regulatory requirement. The executive track remains unchanged. In Germany: 37% female supervisory board representation alongside just 19.7% female management board representation and 4.4% management board chairs.

The pipeline breaks earlier than boards can fix

McKinsey’s 2025 Women in the Workplace report — the eleventh consecutive year of tracking — confirms women remain underrepresented at every pipeline level. For every 100 men promoted into their first management role, 93 women are promoted. For Asian and Latina women: 82. For Black women: 60. For the first time in eleven years, McKinsey identifies a measurable ambition gap: 80% of women want to be promoted versus 86% of men — and the gap widens at entry and senior levels. McKinsey attributes this not to individual choice but to structural signals: women are receiving less organisational support, fewer sponsorships, and fewer flexible work options.

The DEI retreat is real and measurable

Only half of surveyed companies say women’s career advancement is a high priority in 2025. One in six have cut DEI staff or resources. Just 31% of entry-level women have a sponsor, versus 45% of men. Fortune’s December 2025 analysis found women gained a net of only 47 board seats in the Russell 3000 in 2025, compared to 258 in 2024 — and 59% of those gains came from expanding board size rather than replacing male directors.

Female executive leadership pipeline gap board versus C-suite post-quota era

3. Country-by-Country: Where the Executive Gap Is Widest Post-Deadline

France — Board Leader, Executive Laggard

CAC 40 boards: 46.7% female. Female CEOs across SBF indices: less than 10%. No female chair-CEO in the CAC 40. The Rixain Act’s separate requirement — 30% women in senior executive roles by March 2026, rising to 40% by March 2029 — addresses this gap with an obligation continuing well beyond the board deadline.

Germany — The Opt-Out Consequence

Germany exercised the EU directive’s opt-out in November 2024. Women hold just 19.7% of management board seats and 4.4% of chair positions. Without binding executive requirements, Germany’s executive gender gap is unlikely to close through market forces alone.

Italy — The Competition Effect Extends to Executives

Italy’s quota experience produced the competition effect documented in Management Science: the influx of qualified women into board talent pools raised standards for all candidates. Italy’s supply of female executives with board experience is now materially stronger than in markets that relied on voluntary approaches.

Sweden and the Netherlands — Binding Rules, Persistent Executive Gap

Both markets have now moved to binding board requirements. Executive diversity in both markets remains substantially below board levels, and no binding executive targets exist to drive further progress.

United States — Market Pressure, No Mandate, Slowing Progress

The December 2024 Fifth Circuit ruling removed Nasdaq’s board diversity rules. Fortune data shows women ran 11% of Fortune 500 companies in 2025 — but by December 2025 that figure had slipped back to 10.4% as several female CEOs departed. The share of new CEO appointments going to women is at its lowest rate since 2020.

4. What Closing the Executive Gap Now Requires

  • Specialist executive search at every C-suite appointment — a process designed from the outset to find the best female candidate, not one where diversity is secondary. The pipeline of qualified female CFOs, COOs, and CEO-ready executives is real — but largely invisible to standard search processes
  • Outcome-based executive briefs that define roles by what needs to be delivered, not who has done it before. The WEF (2023) documented how overly precise criteria reduce diverse candidate pools through the law of small numbers
  • Active sponsorship — not mentoring. McKinsey 2025: 31% of entry-level women have a sponsor versus 45% of men. Closing this gap at every level is the single most evidenced structural intervention available
  • Executive pipeline metrics tracked and reported at board level — % of C-suite female, % of P&L roles female, depth of female CEO succession pipeline — entirely distinct from board composition metrics

5. The Role of Specialist Search in the Next Chapter

The board compliance question has been answered through legislation and enforcement. The executive leadership question requires a different tool: access to the female executive talent that standard search processes do not reach.

Female Executive Search, powered by CEO Worldwide, has spent seven years building exactly this access. Our network of curated, vetted female executives spans every major sector and the geographies where executive gender diversity is now the defining governance challenge. We do not add diversity as a filter. We build searches around it.

FROM READING TO PROOF

See how quickly a vetted shortlist can be assembled

The pipeline problem is solvable when you search where others don’t. Our community counts 5,000+ vetted senior women executives across 183 countries — CEOs, CFOs, COOs, board directors. Search it yourself by function, industry and country, and judge the calibre before you ever talk to us.

Search our database →

Or submit a search mandate — shortlist in 7–10 days

Related reading

References & Sources

  1. Fortune (June 2025) — Women Run 11% of Fortune 500 Companies in 2025. 55 of 500; nine new female CEOs added, six departed; all new appointments were internal promotions.
    fortune.com
  2. Fortune (August 2025) — Global 500 Hits a Record High for Female CEOs. 33 of 500 Global 500 companies (6.6%) led by women.
    fortune.com
  3. Fortune (December 2025) — Why Women’s Rise to CEO Jobs and Board Seats Is Slowing in Corporate America. Women: 25.5% of new US CEO appointments through October 2025; net gain only 47 Russell 3000 board seats vs 258 in 2024.
    fortune.com
  4. Crist Kolder Associates / CFO Dive (November 2025) — Is the Rise of Female CFOs Pausing — or Stalling Out? Women: 17.5% of Fortune 500/S&P 500 CFOs (June 2025), down from 17.6% in 2024 and 18.5% in 2023.
    cfodive.com
  5. Crist Kolder Associates / CFO.com (February 2026) — CFO-to-CEO Promotions Reach Decade High. Female CEOs: 9.1% (down from 9.7%); female CFOs: 16.5% (down from 17.6%); consumer women CFOs: 30 in 2023 → 17 in 2025.
    cfo.com
  6. Fortune (June 2025) — Women Hold 17% of Fortune 500 CFO Roles. 87 women (17.4%) in 2025; 19 of top 100 Fortune 500 CFOs are women.
    fortune.com
  7. MSCI (March 2026) — Women on Boards and Beyond 2025. Female representation among board chairs, CEOs and CFOs shows signs of stagnation globally.
    msci.com
  8. McKinsey & Company / LeanIn.Org (December 2025) — Women in the Workplace 2025. C-suite: 29% unchanged. 93 women promoted per 100 men. First-ever ambition gap: 80% vs 86%. 31% entry-level women have a sponsor vs 45% of men. One in six companies cut DEI staff.
    mckinsey.com
  9. Glass Lewis (2025/2026) — Update on French Board Gender Diversity. CAC 40: 46.7%; <10% female CEOs; no female chair-CEO in CAC 40 in 2025.
    glasslewis.com
  10. AllBright Foundation / DLA Piper (Autumn 2024) — Frankfurt Stock Exchange boards: 19.7% management boards, 37% supervisory boards, 4.4% management board chairs.
    dlapiper.com
  11. Wiley / Corporate Governance: An International Review (2024) — Lifting Women Up: Gender Quotas and Advancement on Corporate Boards. Substitution effect: board compliance without executive progress.
    onlinelibrary.wiley.com
  12. IEP at Bocconi University (2024) — Italy competition effect; Sweden and Denmark: progress stalled under voluntary measures.
    iep.unibocconi.eu
  13. Altrata (2024) — Global Gender Diversity 2024. Women: 32% of Global 20 board members; 45.5% CAC 40 boards; 6.5% of CEOs globally.
    altrata.com
  14. World Economic Forum (2023) — Create an Executive Search Process That Promotes Diversity. Law of small numbers: overly precise criteria reduce diverse candidate pools in executive search.
    weforum.org

Female Executive Search is powered by CEO Worldwide, the global executive recruitment group founded in 2001. Female Executive Search was launched in 2018 as a dedicated practice exclusively focused on placing female executives at C-suite and board level across four continents. Published July 2026.

]]> 11667 Diversity at the Top: The Proven Business Case for Hiring Female C-Suite Leaders https://www.female-executive-search.com/women-in-leadership/business-case-hiring-female-c-suite-leaders/ Wed, 27 May 2026 16:40:35 +0000 https://www.female-executive-search.com/?p=11517 The business case for gender diversity in senior leadership has moved decisively from hypothesis to documented fact. Yet despite a decade of growing awareness and corporate commitment, the gap between what the evidence recommends and what organisations actually do remains wide — and in some respects, is widening.

This article draws exclusively on research published between 2023 and 2025 to set out the current state of the evidence: what female C-suite leadership delivers, where the gap remains, and what it means for organisations serious about closing it.

1. The State of Representation in 2024–2025

The starting point is the data on where we actually are. The picture is sobering.

McKinsey’s 2024 Women in the Workplace report — the tenth anniversary edition, drawing on data from 281 organisations employing over 10 million people — found that women make up just 29% of C-suite positions globally. This figure has not changed since 2024. At the current rate of progress, it will take almost 50 years to reach parity. Women of colour hold just 7% of C-suite roles.

Russell Reynolds Associates’ 2024 analysis of S&P 100 companies found that men are 2.5 times more likely than women to hold executive roles — and 10.2 times more likely to be CEO. Only six S&P 100 organisations have achieved gender parity on their senior leadership teams. Women remain severely underrepresented in the CEO feeder roles of CFO (18%), COO (10%), and P&L leadership.

On the CFO front specifically, progress is fitful. In Q2 2024, 28% of newly appointed CFOs globally were women — a three-year high, according to Russell Reynolds Associates. But by 2025, that figure had dropped back to 21%, illustrating how fragile gains remain without sustained structural effort.

“At the current rate of progress, it will take almost 50 years for women in corporate America to reach parity in the C-suite.”
— McKinsey Women in the Workplace, 2024

2. Financial Performance: What the 2023–2025 Research Shows

The financial case for female executive leadership has accumulated further evidence in recent years, with studies confirming consistent performance differentials across multiple metrics.

StatisticFinding
+4.5% annuallyCompanies with a female CFO increased shareholder value by an average of 4.5% annually — 0.2% higher than their industries overall (OneStream study, Fortune, August 2025)
+6% stock priceAverage stock price increase within six months of a female CFO appointment, based on S&P Global analysis of firms with women CFOs (2020–2023)
25% more profitableCompanies in the top quartile for gender diversity at executive level are 25% more likely to achieve above-average profitability (McKinsey Women in the Workplace, 2024)
29% of C-suiteWomen’s share of C-suite roles globally in 2024 — up from 17% in 2015 but unchanged from 2024 to 2025, signalling stalled progress (McKinsey, 2025)
32% of boardsWomen now account for 32% of board members across Global 20 major index companies — but just 6.5% of CEOs (Altrata Global Gender Diversity Report, 2024)

A notable 2025 study by finance management platform OneStream — reported in Fortune — found that underperforming companies that hired women as CFOs subsequently saw total shareholder return improve. The study tracked companies with female CFOs against their industry averages, finding consistent outperformance on shareholder value creation. Women CFOs, the study noted, typically take 18 years to reach the CFO chair versus 15 years for men — suggesting a more rigorous professional development path to the role.

3. Risk Governance and Financial Stewardship

One of the most consistently replicated findings in recent research is the association between female executive leadership and stronger financial governance — particularly at CFO and board level.

More conservative, higher-quality financial reporting

Research published in 2023 and 2024 continues to confirm that companies with female CFOs exhibit lower earnings management — the practice of manipulating reported results to meet analyst expectations. S&P Global’s analysis of firms with women CFOs from 2020 to 2023 found that these firms were more likely to exceed earnings expectations in the first two years post-appointment, suggesting a more accurate and transparent approach to financial guidance.

A 2023 MSCI review found that companies with women CFOs score higher on ESG transparency and board diversity — signals of stronger governance culture that are increasingly material to institutional investors.

Better capital allocation decisions

The pattern of more disciplined capital allocation under female leadership is supported by multiple studies. Russell Reynolds Associates’ ongoing analysis of CFO transitions found that female CFOs are increasingly being appointed to the most strategically demanding roles — with 38% of incoming tech CFOs in H1 2024 being women, the highest proportion since 2021, according to their Global CFO Turnover Index.

4. Innovation and Strategic Decision-Making

The performance advantage of gender-diverse leadership extends beyond financial metrics into strategic outcomes — particularly in environments requiring rapid adaptation.

Diverse teams make better decisions

McKinsey’s 2024 Women in the Workplace report confirms that companies with more women in leadership benefit from greater innovation, healthier cultures, and stronger performance. Research cited in the 2024 report found that diverse groups outperform not simply because of an influx of new ideas, but because diversity triggers more careful information processing — an effect absent in homogeneous groups.

The innovation premium

Grant Thornton’s 2024 research on women in leadership noted that greater leadership diversity leads to greater innovation and therefore higher likelihood of higher profits, as well as creating an environment of more inclusive decision-making. As Partner Pallavi Joshi Bakhru noted: “More diversity helps better decision making and when you are making better decisions, you are more intuitive of how the market outside looks.”

5. Talent, Culture, and ESG

The pipeline strengthens from the top down

McKinsey’s 2024 report confirms what earlier research established: the presence of female executives at the top measurably reduces attrition of female talent at mid and senior levels. The “broken rung” — the point at which female talent disproportionately stalls — is less severe in organisations with genuine female C-suite representation. In 2024, for every 100 men promoted to manager, only 81 women were promoted — down from 87 in 2023, a troubling regression. The role model effect from C-suite representation is one of the few structural interventions proven to address this.

ESG and investor expectations in 2024–2025

The investor landscape has shifted materially. Gender diversity at executive and board level is now a core component of ESG evaluation. A 2024 study published in the International Review of Economics & Finance examining the relationship between board gender diversity and ESG performance found that gender diversity positively influences financial performance, sustainable development, and social responsibility — with female directors enhancing decision-making by introducing diverse perspectives.

From a regulatory standpoint, the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), now in force for large listed companies, requires detailed disclosure of gender representation at leadership level. This is no longer a soft metric — it has direct implications for capital access and governance ratings.

Altrata’s Global Gender Diversity 2024 report — tracking board composition across the Global 20 — found that France leads with women representing 45.5% of CAC 40 board members, with the UK at 43.3%. Yet globally, only 6.5% of CEOs are female. The gap between board-level progress and executive-level reality is the defining challenge for search firms and hiring organisations alike.

The Implication for Executive Search

The evidence assembled here points in one direction: female C-suite leadership consistently delivers — on financial performance, risk governance, innovation, talent retention, and ESG outcomes. The organisations that have acted on this evidence have consistently outperformed those that have not.

The gap between knowing and doing remains the central challenge. Closing it requires more than commitment. It requires a search process designed to find the best female executives available — not the most visible, not the most familiar, but the best.

Female Executive Search, powered by CEO Worldwide (global executive recruitment group founded in 2001), has specialised exclusively in placing female executives at C-suite and board level since 2018. We bring 25 years of executive search expertise, a curated global network, and a single-minded focus on placing the leaders who deliver the outcomes the evidence consistently points to.

Ready to build the case internally and find your next female C-suite leader? Visit www.female-executive-search.com or submit a mandate today.

Related reading

References & Sources

All references below are from 2023–2025 publications.

  1. McKinsey & Company / LeanIn.Org (2024) — Women in the Workplace: The 10th Anniversary Report. C-suite representation (29%), broken rung data (81 women promoted per 100 men), parity timeline (50 years), and innovation benefits of gender-diverse leadership.
    https://womenintheworkplace.com/2024
  2. McKinsey & Company (2025) — Women in the Workplace 2025 Report. C-suite representation unchanged at 29%; low-performing companies making uneven gains; company commitment to diversity declining.
    https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/women-in-the-workplace
  3. Russell Reynolds Associates (2024) — Gender Diversity in the C-Suite: Women’s Representation in the 2024 S&P 100. Men 2.5x more likely to be executives; 10.2x more likely to be CEO; only 6 S&P 100 companies at parity.
    https://www.russellreynolds.com/en/insights/articles/gender-diversity-in-the-c-suite-women-representation-in-the-2024-sp-100
  4. Russell Reynolds Associates (2024) — Global CFO Turnover Index Q2 2024. 28% of newly appointed CFOs were women in Q2 2024 — a three-year high. 38% of tech CFO appointments were women in H1 2024.
    https://the-cfo.io/2024/08/15/cfo-ranks-see-an-uptick-in-female-leadership/
  5. Russell Reynolds Associates (2025) — Global CFO Turnover Index 2025: When the Stakes Rise. Female CFO appointment rate falls to 21% globally in 2025, down from 26% in 2024.
    https://www.russellreynolds.com/en/insights/reports-surveys/global-cfo-turnover-index/when-the-stakes-rise
  6. OneStream / Fortune (August 2025) — Companies with Female CFOs Outperform Industry Averages. Female CFO companies grew shareholder value 4.5% annually on average — 0.2% above industry peers. Underperforming companies with female CFO appointments saw TSR improve.
    https://fortune.com/2025/08/29/companies-with-female-cfos-outperform-industry-averages-study-shows
  7. S&P Global (2020–2023 analysis, cited 2024) — Analysis of firms with women CFOs: average 6% stock price increase within six months of appointment; firms with women CFOs more likely to exceed earnings expectations in first two years post-appointment.
    https://www.highradius.com/finsider/female-cfos-in-the-fortune-500/
  8. MSCI ESG Research (2023) — Review finding companies with women CFOs score higher on ESG transparency and board diversity. Referenced in HighRadius analysis of Fortune 500 female CFOs (2024).
    https://www.msci.com/our-solutions/esg-investing/esg-ratings
  9. Altrata (2024) — Global Gender Diversity 2024 Report. Women represent 32% of board members across Global 20 indices; France leads at 45.5% of CAC 40 boards; UK at 43.3%; globally just 6.5% of CEOs are female.
    https://altrata.com/reports/global-gender-diversity-2024
  10. International Review of Economics & Finance (2024) — Board Gender Diversity and ESG Performance. Gender diversity positively influences financial performance, sustainable development, and social responsibility; female directors enhance decision-making through diverse perspectives.
    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S154461232401746X
  11. Grant Thornton Global (2024) — Women in Leadership: A Pathway to Better Performance. Greater leadership diversity drives innovation and improved decision-making; globally, women held 33.5% of senior management roles in 2023–2024.
    https://www.grantthornton.global/en/insights/women-in-business/women-in-leadership-a-pathway-to-better-performance/
  12. European Commission — Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). Mandatory gender representation disclosure requirements now in force for large listed EU companies, with direct implications for capital access and governance ratings.
    https://finance.ec.europa.eu/capital-markets-union-and-financial-markets/company-reporting-and-auditing/company-reporting/corporate-sustainability-reporting_en
]]> 11517