Gender and Leadership - Essay Example

Gender and Work: Gender and Leadership Introduction Gender discrimination has long been an ever-present issue in the workplace. Discrimination against women has been the dominant type of discrimination observed in the workplace, especially in terms of hiring, firing, as well as being promoted or considered for salary increases, relevant assignments, as well as management or leadership positions. Such discrimination has been founded on traditional roles expected for men and women with men traditionally attributed the breadwinner role and the women being attributed the homemaker role. As such, the men have been expected to find work and earn for the livelihood of the family, and the women have stayed home, bearing children, caring for the immediate needs of the family. From the 1950s onwards, new trends were observed as women have been prompted by financial constraints to find work and also help sustain family needs. Such trends grew to more significant proportions, to the current trends which have now been observed in society. Men and women are now equally expected to find work, have careers, or simply work for themselves, not necessarily for their families. Regardless of the seeming egalitarian situation such work conditions have created, issues on discrimination have still been observed. Moreover, such issues have also been very much apparent as far as leadership or managerial positions are concerned. The male: female ratio for managers in organizations very much favours more men occupying leadership roles. However, organizations are often quick to dismiss such trend, arguing that the difference is mainly caused by the fact that men are more interested in gaining managerial roles, and that women can have as much chance to be leaders much as men. This argumentative essay shall analyse the issue or contention that: Women are being discriminated in the workplace in relation to leadership or managerial roles and positions. This essay shall first provide facts relating to statistical figures on women versus male leadership ratio in organizations. Next, it shall argue on one hand how women are still being discriminated against for leadership roles. A different perspective on the argument will also be presented. Also, both sides of the argument will be considered in order to indicate a logical and well-evidenced position on the issue. A conclusion will summarize the arguments and provide a clear and logical answer to the issue raised. A reflective analysis will also provide a personal perspective on the issue. Main body Overview: Male-female ratio in management/leadership positions Although women are already making up a huge proportion of the working population, the actual gender makeup of leadership remains substantially unchanged. According to Forbes, although there is an increase in the number of women leaders, their overall number in the entire work population is still very low1. Based on 2009 figures, women were at 49% of jobs in the US and 50% of these were holding leadership functions. A report by the Department of Labour in 2006 also indicates that there are more women than men in mid-level work as financial managers, human resources managers, medical and health managers, accountants and auditors as well as social community service managers2. However, on top management level positions, the numbers are not very promising for women. Based on 2010 statistics released on the US Fortune 500 leaders, only 2.4% were women3. Based on the FTSE 500 figures, only 1.8% of their companies are women-led. Boardroom access for women is very troubling, especially for the US and UK. In other parts of the world, there are some better numbers for women. In Norway for instance, about 44.2% of their board members are women, especially as the country passed legislation calling for publicly listed companies to include boards at least 40% being women4. For the rest of the world however, the numbers for women leaders are very much dismal. Women are being discriminated against in relation to leadership roles On the one hand, women are still being discriminated against in relation to top leadership roles in companies. While the commitment of companies in increasing the number of women occupying leadership roles has increased in the past few decades, such commitment has not translated to substantial numbers. Women are still being passed on for promotion or placement in top leadership posts5. There are different theories and explanations which would help understand the phenomenon. Some of these theories relate to biology, gender roles, causal factors, as well as attitudinal drivers. One of the premises relating to this essay is that leadership seems to be biologically determined and seems innate for the male gender. In effect, effective leadership can only be seen when men are occupying it6. Such premise is also seen as biased. This premise has not been attributed much support especially as studies have been able to establish that men and women are physiologically different in their leadership styles, however, there is also proof which points to the fact that men and women are actually similar in style, but are still equally effective as leaders7. Not many findings in research have therefore supported the idea that biology can be used as a hypothesis to further define male and female leadership. One’s biological makeup has also been linked to different and more successful leadership styles and beliefs have been persistent on differences in male against female leadership which exist with the perception that other determinants of efficacy must also be present8. For those who support the male leadership type of management, they believe that males have more effective leadership styles as compared to women. Men are said to lean more towards the authoritative and assertive kind of leadership whereas women are said to lean more towards the participative and nurturing type of leadership which would not promote success in organizations9. There is a fixed notion in people’s minds that in order to be successful organizations, aggression, assertiveness, and a strong competitive nature would be needed. Accordingly, men are said to innately have these qualities while women do not or they have to acquire these qualities through experience. Once more, these arguments are founded on preconceived notions or stereotypes about men and women which are primary barriers to women gaining top leadership positions. Elements involving gender roles have emerged in recent years. One of these elements of arguments indicate that there are three, not two genders which are being included in the leadership discussion – the male, the female, and the androgynous10. The androgyny mostly relates to the possession or the manifestation of masculine qualities which are said to be needed in ensuring successful leadership. In effect, individuals who often indicated how they manifested such androgynous qualities without supportive female qualities were also seen as leaders. However, the truth of the situation is that in relation to androgyny, it is in balancing behaviours, not manifesting both types of behaviours which are more important11. Based on a female perspective, the advantages of androgyny reflect much potential. While masculinity has a link with the emergence of leaders, possible relationship between androgyny and leadership implies that having feminine qualities, balanced with masculine ones may also be significant in the perceptions of leadership. Those displaying masculine qualities are often preferred leaders. The considerations here seem to be focused on male leaders possessing the only qualities which can spell company success12. However, the male leadership qualities are not necessarily the best qualities which may lead to company success. The perception of authority among leaders is one which may sometimes be equated with the domination of a leader, and the lack of participation and input from the employees. Participative qualities in leadership are however perceived more among women. However, such participatory leadership style is sometimes viewed in a more haphazard light, one which is difficult to control and manage13. The aggressive male leader would instead simply make the decision with little indecision and take control of the company and its people. The pathway to company success is believed by leaders to be based on such type of leadership alone, not even considering that the more participatory style of leadership which the opposite gender may display may also lead to the same, sometimes even more success for the organization. Women have also been accused of wanting to have it all, and how such wanting cannot actually happen for most women. The picture of a woman who claims to have it all may also show an unhappy married life or of unhappy neglected children14. Such image further highlights the fact that successful women leaders are a rarity because of the burden which society and their family place on them in raising and caring for their families. Again, this implies stereotypical and traditional perspectives for men and women – that men do not have the burden of being successful husbands or fathers inasmuch as women have the burden of being successful homemakers, wives, or mothers. Since most women are unlikely to risk their families for their careers, they often sacrifice shots at top leadership positions. Corporate leaders do recognize this as well and for which reason are unlikely to install women in top leadership roles because they believe that, when made to choose between their families and their work, these women would likely prioritize their families15. Building up these women to be top leaders of corporations may not therefore be seen as a worthwhile or profitable long-term investment for companies. Under these circumstances, despite claims from companies on their higher number of women leaders, women are still being very much discriminated against for top leadership positions. Women are not being discriminated against for top leadership positions Based on the glaring figures presented above on the lesser number of women leaders occupying top leadership roles, it is difficult to argue that women are actually not being discriminated against for top leadership positions16. However, when considering the argument based on the fact that these women are not being discriminated against but are simply not seeking leadership roles, then a clearer understanding of the issue may be established. It can be argued that very few women actually reach top leadership roles because they are not sufficiently committed to these roles17. Some of them do give up their careers or eventually make the decision to leave their work or be committed less to their work when they are made to choose between their work and their families. For single women who are starting off their careers, their commitment to their careers is likely high. However, as they marry and have children, their time and commitment to their careers and their families become issues. Some of these women are unable to manage both aspects of their life equally well without compromising one or the other. Eventually, choices are made in favour of families, mostly because of social and family pressure to be good mothers or wives18. A woman, no matter how progressive society is, is still viewed with the innately nurturing skills which would elect her the mother who would care for the family. For women therefore, their commitment to their careers will eventually be given less priority over their family concerns19. For companies concerned with bottom line profitability, investing on women leaders who would eventually not commit to the company is not considered profitable, not because these women are being discriminated against but because these women would eventually not be committed to these top leadership roles. Conclusion In further considering the positions indicated above, the assumption is still on women being denied top leadership positions. The differences would actually lie in the reason for such denial. On one hand, the reason would be that these women are being discriminated against; on the other hand, these women are being denied top leadership roles not because they are being discriminated against but simply because installing them in leadership roles would not be worthwhile investments for companies. The discrimination can stem from stereotypical considerations with women not being considered effective leaders by the organization and that masculine qualities would be needed to secure company success. However, women leaders displaying less masculine leadership abilities have displayed success as leaders also. Still, their contribution to organizations is often not given as much credence as the male leader. Women are also denied leadership roles simply because of their inability to sufficiently commit to top leadership roles. When made to choose between their families and their careers, these women often choose to give up their careers. For companies, making investments on women leaders is not often seen a profitable venture. Possible directions for research in this case would be to establish what company commitments can be made in order to improve the work conditions for women, allowing them to make a better choice for their careers, without having to sacrifice their role as mothers or as wives. Reflective analysis In considering the above discussion, I am still very much on the fence with the issue. There are many considerations which have to be made for women being installed in top corporate roles and the issue is not so much about discrimination, but what society is willing to allow for these women. Society has major expectations for women in the family front, and women, for the most part, have simply accepted that the burden of caring for their family is theirs. Just as the burden of bearing children is theirs, the expectation to do more than men on the family front is higher. Such notions and conditions have been in place for thousands of years. Even with the introduction of the industrial and the current digital world with all its modern installations and resources, there are traditions which may have been loosened some but not totally relinquished. Although more men are now sharing in the rearing of children, the traditional roles are still dominant for most parts of the world. Under these conditions, I believe that women have limited choices. They cannot actually have it all, or if they have it all, they cannot have the best of both worlds. They cannot be successful career women and top leaders without sacrificing their families, and they cannot be successful mothers or wives without compromising their work as leaders. I am however hopeful about current work situations for women. Although the progress is slow in terms of corporations installing women in leadership positions, corporate leaders are slowly but surely discarding stereotypical views about women. In relation to performance, the notion that women cannot do the work as well as the men can is slowly being discarded especially when women are manifesting major initiative and showing much success in their work as leaders. However, the slow progression towards more egalitarian work conditions is still a major work issue. Some leaders are still trying to deny that the issue exists, however, the situation and the numbers actually speak for themselves. There are less women leaders in corporations and organizations. Such conditions need to be changed in order to allow for women to make worthwhile leadership contributions. References Appelbaum, S. H., Audet, L., & Miller, J. C. (2003). Gender and leadership? Leadership and gender? A journey through the landscape of theories. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 24(1), 43-51. Bosak, J., & Sczesny, S. (2011). Exploring the dynamics of incongruent beliefs about women and leaders. British Journal of Management, 22(2), 254-269. Channar, Z. A., Abbassi, Z., & Ujan, I. A. (2011). Gender discrimination in workforce and its impact on the employees. Pakistan Journal of Commerce & Social Sciences, 5(1). Cheung, F. M., & Halpern, D. F. (2010). Women at the top: powerful leaders define success as work+ family in a culture of gender. American Psychologist, 65(3), 182. Dasgupta, N., & Asgari, S. (2004). Seeing is believing: Exposure to counter stereotypic women leaders and its effect on the malleability of automatic gender stereotyping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40(5), 642-658. Elsesser, K. M., & Lever, J. (2011). Does gender bias against female leaders persist? Quantitative and qualitative data from a large-scale survey. Human relations, 64(12), 1555-1578. Ely, R. J., Ibarra, H., & Kolb, D. M. (2011). Taking gender into account: theory and design for womens leadership development programs. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(3), 474-493. Kolb, J. (1999). The effect of gender role, attitude toward leadership, and self-confidence on leader emergence: Implications for leadership development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 10(4), 305-20. Tamerius, K. L. (2010). Sex, gender, and leadership in the representation of women. Women, Gender, and Politics: A Reader, 243-50. Toegel, G. (2011). Disappointing statistics, positive outlook. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/2011/02/18/women-business-management-forbes-woman-leadership-corporate-boards.html Ward, C., & Hanson, S. D. (2011). Transformational leadership styles among leaders in Singapore schools: A study of gender differences. Leadership education and development, 19. Read More