“Are Women as Effective Leaders as Men?”
In a society, despite all of its development and tolerance, public opinion mostly has been formed by men; therefore the attitude to the women promptly rising on a career ladder and showing miracles of diligence and professional competence always will be extraordinary starting from admiration up to indulgent skepticism. And it means that women still should prove both to the surrounding and to themselves that they can cope with work not worse and frequently even better than their men colleagues. Women should be prepared to take up the challenge, and should not allow men who can’t do the job to influence them. The problem with some women is that they use men whose character has being smeared to help market them, believing that they will help them get to the top of the ladder. This sometimes is a recipe for disaster, and by the time they realized, it has caused them more harm than good, and it is too late to solve the problem. (Photo: Nanette Thomas, APC Dallas Chapter President)
The statistics are not on the side of the weaker sex. Women leaders of large companies and women-politicians in the government or non-government structure make little number than men, who give the basis again to specify ladies, their place: if not in the kitchen, then on positions below men. Laura Lopez, leadership specialist and author of “Connected and Committed Leader”, suggests to ignore the question of who, men or women, is capable of performing more effectively this or that work as, from the scientific point of view, there are no rational reasons for such disputes in present.
From the time when women began to storm actively the career ladder, scientists have become interested in the presence of the necessary qualities to hold a key post or to make the way upward for women. In general, those qualities would be called leadership abilities of women. Apparently, it is impossible to answer unequivocally whether women possess effective leadership traits.
A research conducted by psychologist and IPR Faculty Fellow Alice Eagly says that men and women carrying same functions and responsibilities may perform same efficiently, but to realize that efficiency for others the matter would be how much the task in view “corresponds” to persons sex or gender. For example, women are considered to be much stronger and effective instructors, therefore they turn out to be better teachers and coaches.
It seems men perform much more effective work in which the rigid control and command style of management is required. Women manage better to be transformational leaders. They successfully stimulate and show support to their employees to be more creative and constantly learning. This approach in the modern organizations where the corporate hierarchy is expressed vaguely is actual and effective.
However, not all the companies are similar. Team of work can have negative consequences in the organizations where authoritarian, or as I call it cleanly man’s style, management is required. Those organizations would flow into a category of military departments or sports sphere, a petroleum industry or IT. In such areas women do not constitute a large number, and most of them are not aspired either. In the same way authoritarian or rigid style of management is unacceptable in such cleanly “female” sphere as educational, especially preschool. Tourism and the fashion industry also concern to branches where many women work. Eagley’s research confirms that women are more effective in areas and on roles where female domination is required and performance of the functions focused on women. Emotional character, impulsiveness, propensity to spontaneous decision-making is all possessed by women. They give more attention to details, much more diplomatic and are capable to sustain long-term stress better than men (Institute for Policy Research, p.3). Women, mostly, do not have the habit of filling in the stress with alcohol. Thus, performing leadership functions which coincide with person’s sex or gender does the worker more effective or, at least, is perceived as more effective position.
To define distinctions between female and male management, group of the American psychologists at University of California in Berkley, have lead around two thousand researches on leadership topic. Laboratory researches have shown that women are more democratic and are focused on constructing and strengthening of interpersonal attitudes in collective, and men are more imperious and are focused, first of all, on precise performance of a problem. Women-heads also are inclined to encourage and support their employees for good performance of work, rather than men, which shows positive aspect of business leadership. Men are more inclined to criticism of employees which is impossible to name an effective element of management as psychologists of UC Berkeley approve.
Nevertheless, my view on this part is a little bit different. There is no need, of course, to make a conclusion that there are “born” or biological leadership qualities of men and women. Quite probably that, women knowing the specific attitude of employees to women-heads, intentionally soften the approaches and methods of work. Certainly, each research shows the average tendencies for each sex. So there are variants when female style of a management is inherent in men and vice versa.
According to data of the American Bureau of labor statistics, today woman take each fourth place in top management of large American companies. In many respects women are more successful leaders, rather than men, however they suffer that the role of the head, as a rule, has strong “male image”, especially, if the question is about top positions. When this male image will be destroyed, psychologists perhaps can better understand, whether there is great difference between men and women. It is necessary to hope, that sometime authorities, knowing, that women can be as effective as men, will enable them to take higher and responsible posts. Otherwise, it threatens to turn not having opportunities to show the exclusive qualities that women carry out, which serve as a factor of their career growth.
For now both men, and women adapt and often consider “sexual accessory” in professional sphere. For example, adapting the style of work under men in men’s fields of activity, women have much more chances of a recognition and success as well as men, wishing to raise efficiency of leadership in “female” spheres of activity, should cultivate in their selves skills of interpersonal dialogue.
As for historical evidence of effective men and women leaders, there can be little said about female leadership as women’s influence has been limited. Examples of Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi, and Benazir Bhutto are only exceptions in my view. But it is not to say that historically women are less influential, but it’s the society, public opinion which is formed by men, that limit women access to leadership.
In addition, there is a need to keep in mind the force of perception. Even despite of existence of various styles of management, sexual and gender distinctions are not too important, because the role of the leader makes narrower focus on the influence of person’s behavior and group/organizational outcomes as well. As famous writer and management expert Peter Drucker once said “Effective leadership is not about making speeches or being liked; leadership is defined by results not attributes.”
By Nanette Thomas, APC Dallas President
Stay with Sierra Express Media, for your trusted place in news!
© 2010, https:. All rights reserved.
