Written by Tran Thi Mai

Email: mai.tt@vlu.edu.vn

SAMPLE ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY

TOPIC: Companies should be required to allocate a certain percentage of high-level positions to
women. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Use scholar evidence to
support your point.

Half of the labor force are women, yet a dominant proportion, over 75%, of the executive levels in
companies and organizations belong to males (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020). Although concern about a
reverse discrimination may come as a result, it is strongly believed that companies should allocate
a certain percentage of these high-level positions to women to promote gender diversity because
this can unlock immense potential for companies and society as a whole.

To begin with, requiring quotas for women in leadership positions could be seen as a way to comply
with anti-discrimination laws and help create a better society. Discrimination against women is still
a fact. According to Australian Human Rights Commission (2014), 50% of surveyed mothers
reported being discriminated during their pregnancy, maternal leave or return to work, and nearly a
third of them had to resign or looked for another job, while 18% lost their jobs. A survey among 500
company managers in the UK also showed that around 30% had avoided recruiting a woman that
was likely to start a family (McGoogan, 2018). Therefore, the quota policy can act as a tool to
shatter the glass ceiling that has historically impeded women's ascent to leadership positions.
Once women have their voice in the workplace, their social impacts become more significant. Fine
et al. (2020) claimed that equal access to leadership positions professionally can lower the
political, sociocultural and material difficulties that face women. Hence, it can be said that
ensuring vertical equity in the labor force is a major steppingstone in achieving social equity.

Furthermore, some research demonstrates that companies with gender-balanced leadership

teams outperform their counterparts in critical areas such as profitability, innovation, and overall
decision-making effectiveness. For instance, a huge survey by KcKinsey on more than 10,000 large
corporations across 15 countries revealed that the correlation between the diversity on their
executive board and financial outperformance grew stronger through time (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020)
They reported that companies with more than 30% female executives were more likely to
outperform those with only 10% to under 30% female leaders in terms of innovations, market value
and revenue. This is understandable, considering the richness of experience and varied viewpoints
women bring to the company. The diversity among team members becomes a driving force for each
person to anticipate and evaluate alternative and unexpected viewpoints, accordingly, making
well-rounded decisions (Levine, 2020). Thus, by promoting gender diversity and inclusion,
companies can reap the benefits of diverse thought leadership.

Some may argue that preserving positions for women constitutes "reverse discrimination" against
men, a term demonstrably misused in this context (Khaitan, 2015). However, rather than focusing
on individual cases, policymakers must take a holistic view, recognizing that diversifying the
workplace benefits not just companies but society as a whole (Abrams, 2023). Additionally,
transparent and rigorous selection processes guarantee only qualified women are chosen,
ensuring quotas simply level the playing field by eliminating unconscious bias and granting a
diverse pool of qualified candidates’ fair consideration.
 Written by Tran Thi Mai
Email: mai.tt@vlu.edu.vn

In conclusion, while the concern about quotas for women in leadership may exist, the evidence for
their positive impact is irrefutable. They foster diversity of thought, bring better business innovation
and performance, and drive positive change for both companies and society. This, ultimately,
represents the essence of true progress.

Works Cited List

Abrams, L. (2023, May 5). Reverse discrimination: Is it really happening?. Linkedin.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/reverse-discrimination-really-happening-luann-abrams/

Australian Human Rights Commission. (2014). Supporting working parents: Pregnancy and return
to work national review—Community guide.
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/SWP_Community%20Guide_2014.pdf

Dixon-Fyle, S., Dolan, K., Hunt, D.V., & Prince, S. (2020, May 19). Diversity wins: How inclusion
matters. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/diversity-
and-inclusion/diversity-wins-how-inclusion-matters

Fine, C., Sojo, V., & Lawford‐Smith, H. (2020). Why does workplace gender diversity matter?
Justice, organizational benefits, and policy. Social Issues and Policy Review, 14(1), 36–72.
https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12064

Khaitan, T. (2015). A theory of discrimination law. Oxford University Press.

Levine, S. (2020, Jan 15). Diversity confirmed to boost innovation and financial results. Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2020/01/15/diversity-confirmed-to-boost-
innovation-and-financial-results/?sh=356cbaedc4a6

McGoogan, C. (2018, July 21). Third of bosses avoid hiring women who could have women soon.
The Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/business/third-bosses-avoidhiring-
women-could-have-children-soon/