Americas Declining Leadership and the Challenges of Having More Women Leaders - Movie Review Example

June 6, America’s Declining Leadership and the Challenges of Having More Women Leaders The twenty-first century poses various challenges to America and women leaders. Nowadays, several developed and developing countries are leading in certain leadership indicators, such as GDP growth, academic outcomes, and international trade, and they are not America. At the same time, despite gains in gender inequality, only 9 % of top managers are women and, where women used to do somewhat well, the numbers of women in professional positions declined from14.2 percent in 2004 to 12.8 percent in 2011 (Ross). The paper asks why America does not lead well anymore and why women leaders are not rising to the top leadership positions. America does not lead well any longer in the world because of its increasing income inequality and loss of inspiration and motivation to lead. Furthermore, women leaders do not rise to the top because they underestimate their abilities, are reluctant to fight for their financial worth, do not have a clear understanding and vision of their success, and face obstacles due to gender roles and expectations and competition. America does not lead anymore because of increasing income inequality. A large middle class is a sign of wealth and leadership because it indicates that the wealth of the nation is largely equitably distributed (Leonhardt and Quealy). America, however, has a middle class that is no longer the richest in the world because of the increasing gap between the rich and the poor. It still has some of the richest people in the world; however, its middle class is decreasing and its poor are getting poorer (Leonhardt and Quealy). LIS, a group that manages the Luxembourg Income Study Database, compiled income data all over the world. It reported alarming trends: “After-tax middle-class incomes in Canada — substantially behind in 2000 — now appear to be higher than in the United States. The poor in much of Europe earn more than poor Americans” (Leonhardt and Quealy). LIS further stressed: “A family at the 20th percentile of the income distribution in this country makes significantly less money than a similar family in Canada, Sweden, Norway, Finland or the Netherlands” (Leonhardt and Quealy). Thirty-five years ago, America’s middle class made more than these nations (Leonhardt and Quealy). If the middle class of America is no longer the wealthiest, they may be losing their purchasing power. The article suggests that, with the falling economic power of the middle class, many Americans are losing their leadership edge too, either as a cause of the diminishing middle class or something that produces the further weakening of the middle class. Furthermore, America has lost its leadership because many Americans have lost inspiration and motivation to lead. Simon Sinek differentiates great companies and leaders from mediocre ones. Using the examples of Apple Orville and Wilbur Wright, he showed that great leaders follow the principle of the golden circle. This circle is based on biology. Sinek explains that human’s newest Homo sapien brain, the neocortex, provides the “what” level of thinking; it accounts for rational and analytical ideas and language (Sinek). The center two sections of the brain are the limbic brains, where feelings are situated and which direct human behaviors, including decision-making (Sinek). Sinek argues that, when companies communicate to consumers from the outside in, the latter can understand facts and benefits, but knowing these cannot drive their behaviors. They focus on attracting the neocortex, which results to communicating from the outside in. The same also happened to Samuel Pierpont Langley, who had access to money, capital, and market conditions, and who many expected to make the first powered man flight. However, he did not have any engaging vision, apart from being famous and wealthy (Sinek). Sinek further narrates that Orville and Wilbur Wright did not have money, college education, and social connections. However, they had a purpose and their purpose had driven them and every person who helped them: “They believed that if they could figure out this flying machine, itll change the course of the world” (Sinek). The Wilbur brothers communicated from the inside out, which enabled them to connect to the limbic brains that control behavior. In other words, Sinek provides the recipe for leadership that is based on motivation and inspiration: “People dont buy what you do; they buy why you do it, and what you do simply serves as the proof of what you believe.” America no longer leads because it does not have many companies that can make people believe in their leadership, whether these people are their employees or their consumers. Stanley McChrystal agrees because he believes that leadership only works through having a “shared consciousness and purpose.” American companies are losing this sense of shared consciousness and purpose because they too focused on the bottom line. Without something meaningful that binds them from the inside out, they cannot create innovations and unite their employees towards these innovations. While America is losing its leadership edge, women leaders are having a hard time rising on top because they underestimate their abilities, are reluctant to fight for their financial worth, and do not have a clear understanding and vision of their success. Sheryl Sandberg describes that women often diminish their abilities, and if they do that, they lack the motivation to stay at the table, which refers to the symbolic table of managers and leaders. She states: “We have to tell our daughters and our colleagues [that]…to reach for the promotion, to sit at the table, and we have to do it in a world where, for them, there are sacrifices they will make for that, even though for their brothers, there are not.” Many women fail to sit at the table and stay there, until they get to the top. In addition, women hardly fight for their financial worth. Sandberg mentions a study which shows that, “in the last two years of people entering the workforce out of college showed that 57 percent of boys entering… are negotiating their first salary, and only seven percent of women [did the same].” Women do not want to fight for their worth, which diminishes their net worth too as potential leaders. Furthermore, women have a hard time becoming top leaders because they do not have a clear understanding and vision of their success. Sandberg explains: “If you ask men why they did a good job, theyll say, "Im awesome. Obviously. Why are you even asking?" However, “If you ask women why they did a good job, what theyll say is someone helped them, they got lucky, they worked really hard” (Sandberg). She stresses that this “matters a lot” because “no one gets to the corner office by sitting on the side, not at the table, and no one gets the promotion if they dont think they deserve their success, or they dont even understand their own success.” Sandberg is saying that women do not get the top positions because they are afraid to fight for these positions. Society, furthermore, presents obstacles to women because of gender roles and expectations. Sandberg explains that women continue to be the ones dropping out of the workforce because they fear that they cannot balance personal fulfillment and a successful career or business. Women are still expected to be the parents who will leave work to take care of their children and husbands. Oftentimes, as Sandberg points out, they plan too early ahead, which results in lying back too early that they lose out on the promotions and assignments that make their jobs interesting and challenging. In addition, society has double standards when it comes to gender and success. Sandberg notes that: “the data shows, above all else, is one thing, which is that success and likeability are positively correlated for men and negatively correlated for women. And everyones nodding, because we all know this to be true.” Women cannot be aggressive and competitive because they are looked down when they do so. If they cannot be competitive because doing so would have a negative effect on their likeability and ability to attain top leadership positions, they are lost on what they have to do to climb to the top. Furthermore, competition is a large obstacle to women rising to the top. Women do not mentor each other because companies rarely promote more than one woman to the top positions (Ross). Senior female managers do not mentor junior female managers because they know that companies do not promote many women to leadership positions, so this means that upward opportunities are scarce for women. They may see female junior managers as threats, instead of partners in the organization. At the same time, men do not want to promote women at more than 20% of their management composition because they can be a threat to their leadership positions (Ross). Ross explains why this happens: “…once a minority reaches a certain threshold, the majority often feels threatened.” Women feel the constraints on them because of the glass ceiling that women and men impose on them. America does not lead anymore because of its rising income inequality and loss of inspiration and motivation to lead. Moreover, women leaders do not rise to the top because they underestimate their abilities, are disinclined to fight for their financial worth, do not have a clear understanding and vision of their success, and face social obstacles due to gender roles and expectations and competition. Leadership is not something that happens. America and women must consciously and strongly take the leadership helm. They must appeal inside out to gain supporters too. Otherwise, America will lose its leadership in many industries, while women cannot rise to the topmost positions, even when they deserve them. Works Cited Leonhardt, David, and Kevin Quealy. “The American Middle Class Is No Longer the World’s Richest.” The New York Times, 22 Apr. 2014. Web. 1 June 2015. Ross, David. “Why Are There So Few Women in Corporate Leadership?” Columbia Ideas at Work, 2013. Web. 1 June 2015. Sandberg, Sheryl. “Why We Have Too Few Women Leaders.” Ted. Ted, 2009. Web. 1 June 2015. Sinek, Simon. “How Great Leaders Inspire Action.” Ted. Ted, 2009. Web. 1 June 2015. Stanford Graduate School of Business. “Stanley McChrystal: Leadership Is a Choice.” YouTube. YouTube, 17 Feb. 2012. Web. 1 June 2015. Read More