On behalf of the board of the Massachusetts Conference for Women, the country’s largest annual women’s conference, we advocate for the empowerment of women, for gender equity in business, for pay equity, and for ensuring women are represented on corporate boards. As such, we were dismayed to read the Globe’s June 2 front-page story, “Brigham chief carrying three outside paid jobs,’’ regarding Dr. Elizabeth Nabel, chief executive of Brigham and Women’s Hospital. The story observed that, besides her distinguished professional and academic accomplishments, “she also finds time to hold three other paying positions, which is unusual for a Boston hospital president.’’ 

The story suggests that such external activities might affect her duties at the Brigham, but fails to examine why her compensated obligations should be any more of a distraction than the unpaid board activity of her peers.

The irony here is that Nabel is exactly the kind of leader who should be acclaimed rather than criticized for her accomplishments. In this day and age, when it is so hard to get women on boards, a female executive who reaches that position should be celebrated rather than called into question.

Consider the barriers. As recently as last year, the advocacy group Catalyst found that only 19 percent of board members at S&P 500 companies were women. The Globe’s own survey in December reported that only 20 percent of board members of Massachusetts public companies were women or people of color. The lack of diversity on corporate boards persists even though “companies with more diverse boards pay higher dividends and enjoy more stable stock prices,’’ as the Globe reported then. We believe articles such as the one about Nabel’s board activity, and its placement on the front page, are counterproductive to the closing of this gap.

The dearth of women on boards reflects the limited leadership opportunities for female executives, while the discussion of paid board positions seems to condem those women who do ascend to these extremely rare roles. As the Globe reported in December, board members “play a critical role’’ at their organizations and many are paid for their participation, with some earning more than $1 million a year. Nabel earns a fraction of that amount as a board member of Medtronic. How many male executives in the United States accept similar or greater pay to serve on outside boards while also holding down a day job? How many male CEOs in Massachusetts are in that category? Women should not be held to a different standard of scrutiny on this issue.

Gloria C. Larson

Marian L. Heard

Micho F. Spring

Pamela A. Wickham

Boston