Ignore causation, correlation is enough

The submissions in response to the BEIS corporate governance inquiry that have been posted so far make for interesting reading, especially on the board gender diversity question. 

Mr Michael Romberg, "a former civil servant who has held posts in HM Treaury and the Home office", observes that: "The biggest noise in this arena comes from bourgeois women." 

And one of the noisy bourgeois women, Helena Morrissey, somewhat astonishingly states that:

"There is plenty of empirical evidence (McKinsey, CSFB, Citibank, SocGen have all published extensive analyses, based on Global, Australian and European companies respectively) pointing to a positive correlation between gender diversity on boards and company performance. It is irrelevant that causality can’t be proved – arguably the smart companies ‘get it’ around diversity and are therefore likely to be more likely to be forward looking in other areas."

So, in this post-referendum topsy-turvy world, just as opinion is enough, never mind the evidence of experts, it seems that correlation is enough, never mind causality.

Here are some enlightening correlations: http://tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

The Parker Review

So now we have another knight of the realm reviewing the state of the British boardroom. Sir John Parker says:

"This is not an exercise of tokenism; the recommendations are underpinned by strong industrial logic and the need for UK companies to be competitive in the increasingly challenging global marketplace."

What is this "strong industrial logic"? Let's apply some logical thinking to the consequences for board composition. If a board is required to increase diversity based on gender and ethnicity, how is its nomination committee going to balance this with the need for directors with the particular skills and experience relevant to the strategy of the company? 

And why should diversity be limited only to gender and ethnicity? What about age? Boards are now characterised as "male, stale and frail" so presumably the frail bit is next on the agenda. (And let's not ignore the fact that neither Davies nor Parker is female or in the first flush of youth...)

And perhaps someone can point me in the direction of evidence that links board composition to competitiveness...