Help with peer responses due in 6 hours
2
Women In Leadership: Perspectives and Challenges
Theresa Vance
Professor Lear
HUM 5500 Human Services Administration
July 27, 2021
Women In Leadership: Perspectives and Challenges
According to Miller, Benson, and Hardley (2016), the central challenge in women leadership is that ‘Women are much less likely than men to be considered leaders’. The problem of women's leadership is more pronounced when racial factors are accounted for. Hispanic, Black, and Hispanic women combined make up less than 3% of total women representation in leadership in Fortune 500 companies (Warner, et al., 2020). This paper explores the phenomenon of the disproportionate number of women leaders in corporate, political, and academic, and organizational contexts. It draws from recent research findings to demonstrate the existence of a gender gap in leadership and maps its historical emergence in society. Moreover, the paper maintains cognizance of the complexity of the problem of women’s representation in leadership by noting the interplay of sociocultural and psychological factors that influence perceptions and norms about women leaders. Case examples are drawn from renowned contemporary women leaders to further elaborate these perspectives.
Why is women’s representation in leadership important? First, it is the mark of a free meritocracy to give equal opportunities to all individuals despite their gender or other partisan factors. Ensuring non-gendered access to leadership is a precondition for social fairness since leadership is powerful and consequential. Those in positions of leadership have great leverage in influencing social, political, economic, and policy outcomes that work for or against certain groups in society. Disproportionate access to leadership positions, therefore, translates into inequity in society because certain groups are underrepresented. Moreover, research has demonstrated the implications of gender-inclusive leadership on organizational performance. A 2012 study by Credit Sussie reported that corporations that had at least one woman in their managing boards performed better financially in terms of equity returns and sales (Horowitz, et al., 2018). Beyond financial outcomes, these corporations also demonstrated improved capacity for corporate social responsibility and greater levels of business ingenuity and innovation. Therefore, gender-inclusive leadership is a predictor of organizational success. Studies of the 2008/2009 recession have shown that women-led organizations were half as likely to lay off staff than those headed by men (Horowitz, et al., 2018). Tate & Young (2015) further report that organizations that have the least pay gaps between men and women are more likely to be led by women leaders. While these statistics do not justify the assertions put forward about women in leadership, they are important in restructuring the leadership dialogue which has historically been skewed towards masculinity and setting the precedence for greater gender inclusion in leadership.
A report by the Women and Leadership Theory Think Tank provides three fundamental assertions for understanding the current state of women's leadership. First, patriarchy in its present manifestations has important implications on women and leadership theory. This is by the use of male-normed concepts for theorizing leadership, the bifurcated application of gender theory in leadership, and the use of concepts and metaphors that connote gendered bias in leadership, such as ‘women leaders’. Second, superficial theories on contemporary issues, most of which are steeped in neoliberal ideologies, distract from solving the real underlying issues through narrow perspectives on leadership. Moreover, theorizing women leadership rarely accounts for the objective experiences of women leaders hence lacking proper context and agency.
Equally important are the socially held perceptions about women in leadership which result in stereotypes and misrepresentation of these women. Research indicates that people have different perceptions of the severity of the gender gaps in leadership positions; while about 75% of women interviewed think that women are unequally represented in leadership, only half of men think that gender gaps in leadership are a real problem (Warner, et al., 2020). It is important that people understand the gravity of the problem before strategies to bridge the gender gap can be effectively implemented. For instance, men are less likely to be cognizant of the barriers that hold back women in leadership and therefore less likely to act (Warner, et al., 2020). Gendered perceptions on leadership equally create different expectations for male and female leaders with no objective consideration for experience. Most of the barriers that women leaders are subtle and normalized as tests of competence. Notably, some of the initiatives implemented to correct the gender gap in leadership have been counterproductive because they strive for equality and not equity – by leveling the playing field, they make it easier for men to access leadership without accounting for the unique challenges women leaders face (Longman, et al., 2015). This is true first in social and political contexts, and corporate, legal, academia, and organizational domains. Research data indicates that the majority of people are in favor of greater representation of women in leadership, there are still more systemic, cultural, and structural barriers to women leaders compared to men (Horowitz, et al., 2018). The quest to achieve gender parity in leadership positions is made bleak by the reality that women are required to work harder and endure more challenges to achieve equal leadership success as men, and that the situation has been largely accepted as the norm. While there are other factors that determine leadership effectiveness, gendered discrimination in leadership is a major issue in both corporate and political contexts.
In the paper ‘Women and the Labyrinth of Leadership’, Eagly & Carli (2012) identify the ‘the scarcity of women in top leadership’ and posit that the main challenge is not a lack of urgency in providing solutions but that the problem has been misdiagnosed in the first place. Although women leaders make up over 40% of middle-level managerial positions in corporates within the United States, they constitute less than 10% of executive leadership, with only 2% of Fortune 500 CEOs being women, and the boards of these companies being composed of 15% women (Warner, et al., 2020). Further, there is a ‘glass ceiling’ phenomenon that tends to prevent women who rise the ranks of corporate and political leadership from consolidating their influence as leaders in these positions. Although most 20th-Century misconceptions of innate differences between men and women in such aspects as intelligence and emotion have been debunked, inklings of these perceptions still influence the collective subconscious, and by consequence the confidence that people, especially men, have on women leaders. Horowitz, et al., (2018) in the paper ‘Women and Leadership 2018’ note that while 87% of women think that having more women leaders in politics is good for the country, only 51% of men agree.
The discrimination against women leaders is the result of both conscious and unconscious biases that are linked to sociocultural factors. Psychology literature posits general temperamental differences between men and women as described in personality frameworks such as the Big Five (Longman, et al., 2015). In these contexts, women are described as sensitive, understanding, and affectionate while men are generally categorized as assertive and competitive. Traditionally, these masculine characteristics have been associated with leadership success. Is this objectively true, or has the sustained preponderance of men in leadership created a subconscious implicit association between masculinity and leadership? Moreover, applying these broad categorizations creates the impression that women are not suited for ‘powerful’ jobs, the repeated assertion of which creates deeply embedded stereotypes (Horowitz, et al., 2018). As a result, women who display ambition in leadership are perceived as controlling and domineering while men who display the same qualities are praised as assertive. This double standard is a key discourager for capable women from pursuing positions of leadership. Hence, women leaders face disproportionate challenges in reconciling their preferred leadership style with social expectations and reception of their work. While women have been described as generally more transformational in their approach to team building and support, they are expected to be less involved in disciplinary and corrective processes. Implicit bias manifests when ‘a person consciously rejects stereotypes but still unconsciously makes evaluations based on stereotypes’ and is demonstrated in the disproportionate preference for male bosses among both men and women. This is also experienced by women leaders as ‘role incongruity’ in which ‘Women whose leadership style runs counter to female stereotypes often experience resistance or backlash’ (Storberg-Walker & Madsen, 2017). Goethals & Hoyt (2016) refers to this as the leadership double blind: ‘highly feminine women are criticized for being decent leaders and highly masculine women experience backlash for not being female enough’. This pressure to conform to a prescription of feminine niceness puts a hurdle to the effectiveness of women leaders.
Social activism for gender representation has failed to achieve the same level of success in leadership as it has had in other professions. This is attributable to the multi-level historical and structural factors that underlay the leadership gap. This is also despite the gains in bridging literacy and empowerment discrepancies between men and women; a unique ‘women’s experience’ of leadership is therefore created by the disproportionate challenges that women face in pursuit of leadership roles (Lanik, 2020). Miller, Benson, and Handley (2016) note that these discrepancies cannot be said to organically level out with time and that strategic initiatives are necessary to achieve needed change. The Finnish government led by prime minister Sanna Marin sets an unlikely precedent. The young female prime minister leads a coalition led primarily by women, and a cabinet composed of mostly women, four of whom are in their thirties. Although a possible win for women in leadership, Ms. Marin has been criticized for gender inequality, for which heads of state leading primarily male-dominated governments are not criticized.
There are presently twenty-nine elected or appointed female heads of state in the world, and over a hundred countries have never had a female head of state in their history. Women’s political representation in other capacities such as Congress, parliamentary, or cabinet positions is equally skewed. Gendered representation in political leadership is particularly important since political office holds the greatest sway in social and economic policy. The political domain, however, also presents the greatest challenge to women leaders since it is a public endeavor and relies on the approval and perceptions of the general society, most of which are skewed against the possibility of women wielding political power (Longman, et al., 2015).
Miller, Benson, & Handley (2016) introduce a ‘pipeline problem’ of women leadership: although women presently make up the greater proportion of undergraduates in all courses except for professional degrees, and that in the last decade women in the United States have earned the greater proportion of masters and graduate degrees than men and giving them the capacity necessary to take up positions of leadership, the gender gap in top leadership has not changed significantly (Storberg-Walker & Madsen, 2017). At what point in the hierarchy do these ambitious and capable women get barred from further progress? The metaphorical ‘glass ceiling of women leadership’ has been attributed to various factors of a social, cultural, and personal nature. Gender and sex discrimination in the workplace creates hostile work situations for women (Horowitz, et al., 2018). Gender preferences for certain positions are sometimes explicitly stated in corporate policy and standards, and stereotypes against women leaders inhibit their capacity to compete fairly for these positions. Hilary Clinton’s political campaign in 2016 provided important public revelations about the challenges that women face in pursuit of leadership positions. Evidently, society has not fully embraced the idea of women holding powerful positions, and those who, like Hillary Clinton, attempt to occupy powerful positions are written off not based on their competence but their gender. During a 2016 presidential debate, Hillary Clinton was labeled a ‘nasty woman’ by a male opponent for being forceful and assertive in her submissions (Storberg-Walker & Madsen, 2017).
Cultural and historical norms relating to family responsibilities and caregiving present significant obstacles to women’s leadership ambitions. Women are more likely to take family leave than their male counterparts, are more likely to take longer parental leave, are highly to halt their careers for family and caregiving responsibilities, and are therefore generally more likely to lose career and leadership opportunities under the influence of gender socialization and cultural norms. Moreover, women have less access to the social capital and networking resources deemed necessary for access to positions of leadership. Goethals & Hoyt (2016) posits the notion of women’s ‘leadership labyrinth’ in which ‘women encounter multifaceted barriers that not only result in lack of numerical parity between women and men in leadership, but also critical gender differences in the nature of leadership positions’ (Goethals & Hoyt, 2016). However, modern evolution in family dynamics, gender roles, workplace expectations, and the outcomes of the feminist movement has had significant positive impacts on women’s career and leadership opportunities.
A ‘conspiracy of silence’ in which leadership ‘data by sex became strangely inaccessible’ so that gender representation in various levels of leadership can be accurately mapped is a major obstacle to gender equality initiatives in leadership (Goethals & Hoyt, 2016). Research is, therefore, an important factor in understanding and addressing the gender gap in leadership. Moreover, diversity training programs have been important tools for bias reduction and self-monitoring to dispel stereotypes and improve engagement. Integrating leadership training in curricula is also important in shifting thinking and changing gendered mindsets about leadership. Implicit association testing in corporate and political environments is equally powerful in highlighting an individual’s hidden biases and has been shown to have positive implications on reducing gendered perceptions about leadership. Moreover, employment and workplace reforms for eliminating discrimination in selection and promotion processes can help remove the barriers that women leaders face. Policy initiatives such as gender quotas in leadership can be applied, although these have been criticized for prioritizing equity over merit. Women's representation in leadership should be pursued not because it is good for corporate baselines but because it is right in a fair and free society.
References
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2018). Women and the labyrinth of leadership (pp. 147-162). Routledge.
Goethals, G. R., & Hoyt, C. L. (Eds.). (2016). Women and leadership: History, theories, and case studies. Berkshire Publishing Group.
Miller, K., Benson, K., Hill, C., & Handley, G. (2016). Barriers and Bias: The Status of Women in Leadership. American Association of University Women.
Horowitz, J. M., Igielnik, R., & Parker, K. (2018). Women and leadership 2018. Wide Gender and Party Gaps in Views About the State of Female Leadership and the Obstacles Women Face. Retrieved July, 12(2020), 5-6.
Lanik, Martin (2020). Why Women And Minorities Are Being Left Behind In The Leadership Pipeline. CEOWorld Magazine.
Longman, K. A., Ngunjiri, F. W., & Cherrey, C. (2015). Women and leadership around the world. S. R. Madsen (Ed.). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Storberg-Walker, J., & Madsen, S. R. (2017). The women and leadership theory think tank report 2015.
Warner, J., Ellmann, N., & Boesch, D. November (2020). “The Women’s Leadership Gap Women’s Leadership by the Numbers”.