In an exclusive test, the president and chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway explains why women are the key to American prosperity.
In the flow of words recently written on women and work, a linked point and extremely significant seems to me to have been neglected. This has to do with the future of America, of which – there is a familiar opinion on my part – I am an unreserved optimist. Now, entertain another opinion: women are a major reason why we will do so well.
Start with the fact that the progress of our country since 1776 has been breathtaking, like nothing that the world has ever seen. Our secret sauce was a political and economic system that triggers human potential to an extraordinary degree. Consequently, the Americans today enjoy an abundance of goods and services that no one could have dreamed of a few centuries ago.
But it is not half of it – or, rather, it is almost half. America has forged this success while largely using only half of the country’s talent. For most of our history, women – whatever their abilities – were relegated to the sidelines. It was only in recent years that we have started to correct this problem.
Despite the inspiring claims of “all men” in the declaration of independence, male supremacy quickly devoted itself to the Constitution. In article II, dealing with the presidency, the 39 delegates who signed the document – all men, naturally – used male pronouns. In poker, they call it a “Tell”.
Finally, 133 years later, in 1920, the United States softened its discrimination against women via the 19th amendment, which gave them the right to vote. But this law barely moved attitudes and behaviors. In his wake, 33 men got up at the Supreme Court before Sandra Day O’Connor made the note – 61 years after the ratification of the amendment. For those of you who love figures, the chances that the procession of men occurring by chance is more than 8 billion for one.
Watch an interview with Warren Buffett on women, work and other wisdom
When people questioned the absence of named people, the standard response during these 61 years was simply “no qualified candidate”. The electorate has taken a similar position. When my father was elected to the congress in 1942, only eight of his 434 colleagues were women. A lonely woman, the Margaret Chase Smith of Maine, seated in the Senate.
Resistance among powerful is natural when change comes up against their personal interest. Business, politics and, yes, religions provide many examples of such defensive behaviors. After all, who wants to double the number of competitors for the main positions?
But an even greater enemy of change could well be the anchored attitudes of those who simply cannot imagine a world different from that in which they lived. What happened in my own family provides an example. I have two sisters. The three of us were considered, by our parents and our teachers, as having an almost equal intelligence and IQ tests have in fact confirmed our equality. For a long time, to start, my sisters had much “social” IQ than me (no, we were not tested for this – but believe me, the evidence was overwhelming.)
As I got out of my mother’s belly, however, my possibilities overshadowed those of my brothers and sisters, because I was a boy! And my brothers and sisters Brainy, kind and beautiful were not. My parents also love us and our teachers would give us similar notes. But in each turn, my sisters would be told – more through signals than words – that success for them would be to “marry well”. In the meantime, I heard that the opportunities of the world were there for me to seize.
So, my floor has become the ceiling of my sisters – and no one thought of tearing this model until a few decades ago. Now, thank God, the structural barriers for women fall.
Plus: how can genial women meet the remuneration gap
There is still an obstacle: too many women continue to impose limits, saying to the realization of their potential. Here too, I had a first -hand experience.
Among the dozens of brilliant and interesting women that I have known was the late Katharine Graham, for a long time the control shareholder and CEO of the Washington Post Co. (WPO) Kay knew that she was intelligent. But she had undergone brain washing – I don’t like this word, but it is appropriate – by her mother, her husband and who knows who else believe that men were superior, especially in business.
On the death of her husband, it was in the personal interest of some of the men around Kay to convince her that her feelings of insufficiency were justified. The pressures they exerted were tortured. Fortunately, Kay, in addition to being intelligent, had an inner strength. The appellant, she managed to ignore the baritone voices which pressed her to give her her inheritance.
I met Kay in 1973 and I quickly saw that she was a person with an unusual capacity and character. But the doubt of self -linked to the genre was certainly there too. Her brain knew better, but she could never see the voice in her who said: “Men know more about the management of a business than you will never do.”
I told Kay that she had to throw the mirror of the fun house that others had put in front of her and see herself instead in a mirror that reflected reality. “So,” I say, “you will see a woman who is a match for anyone, man or woman.”
I would like to be able to pretend that I succeeded in this campaign. The proof was certainly on my side: the stock of Washington Post increased by more than 4,000% – it is 40 for 1 – during the 18 years of Kay as a boss. After her retirement, she won a Pulitzer prize for her superb autobiography. But his doubt has remained, a testimony to the depth of a message of unworthiness can be implanted in a brilliant spirit.
Plus: Warren Buffett can be embittered on actions
I am happy to say that funhouse mirrors become less common among the women I meet. Try to put one in front of my daughter. She will just laugh and crush her. Women should never forget that it is common for powerful and apparently self -confident men to have more than the Oz assistant. Pull the curtain aside and you will often discover that they are not supermen after all. (Just ask their women!)
So, my comrades, what is it for us? Why should we worry about whether the remaining obstacles facing women are dismantled and that the mirrors of the fun house? It does not matter that I believe that if ethical in itself is convincing. Instead, let’s look at your personal interest.
No manager operates its factories at 80% efficiency when measures could be taken, which would increase production. And no CEOs want male employees to be underused when improving training or working conditions would increase productivity. So go further: if the obvious advantages flow from the male component of the workforce to achieve its potential, why in the world would you not want to include its counterpart?
Other men, get on board. The more America is close to the fully closer to the talents of all its citizens, the greater its production of goods and services. We have seen what can be accomplished when we use 50% of our human capacity. If you visualize what 100% can do, you will join me as a frantic optimist on the future of America.
This story comes from the May 20, 2013 issue of Fortune.
This story was initially presented on Fortune.com
