Gender Bias Of Becoming A Leader

When analyzing leadership characteristics and styles, there are considerable differences in gender characteristics that are identified. Men are considered to have “masculine” traits, such as being

Leadership - The perception of excellence in business leadership needs to be re-examined. This requires challenging the norms that determine leadership eligibility. Are there drivers that perpetuate a leadership incumbency that excludes females? What is the basis for these drivers?

One identified contributor to women's slower than expected assent into leadership is the persistence of assumptions and stereotypes that women are intrinsically "communal" or "dependent" and "passive", and therefore, lack the capacity to succeed as leaders. (National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine of the National Academies, 2006 as cited by Isaac, Kaatz & Carnes, 2012).

In prior studies, leadership roles have been based off one’s sex instead of gender. According to Park, male gender qualities characterized as; aggressive, independent, objective, logical, rational,analytical, decisive, confident, assertive, ambitious, opportunistic and impersonal are distinguished from female gender qualities described as; emotional, sensitive, expressive, cooperative, intuitive, warm, tactful, receptive to ideas, talkative, gentle, empathetic, and submissive (p. 12). These characteristics brings up the notion of how women pursue being leaders because they are opposite of men who dominates the leadership

There are numerous research conducted around diversity issues. The challenges female leaders face is a topic that I am keenly interested in exploring. Many studies have evolved around gender equality. Regardless of the promotion towards gender equality, there are still several inequalities that continue to exist. As Chin and Trimble (2015) identified that though many nations have promoted gender equality, there are struggles associated with gender access

Despite the fact that Northouse (2016) offers many reasons why gender should not matter in leadership, it does still matter. Eagly & Johnson and van Engen & Willemsen (as cited by Northouse, 2016) state that “one robust gender difference found across settings is that women led in more democratic, or participative manner than men” (p. 402). Female leaders have also been shown to use more adaptive and transformational leadership styles, but Ayman, Korabik, and Morris (as cited by Northouse, 2016) point out that male subordinates still devalue these female leaders despite the fact that their leadership style predicts effectiveness (p. 402). Eagly, Karau, and Makhijani (as cited by Northouse, 2016) conducted a study that showed women to be just

Catalyst (2012) indicated that corporate world data showed that women represented only 4% of chief executive officer positions within Fortune 500 companies; similarly, DeFrank-Cole et al. (2013) advised that the lack of progress for women is dumbfounding considering that for the last 25 years; women’s entrance into professional and managerial careers has been on par with their male colleagues. Relatedly, Barsh (2012) identified a disparity of gender representation in senior leadership within the corporate pipeline from 2012 to 2015. Hannum et al. (2015), added that fundamental changes are underway in the higher education segment; noting that female leaders are needed who are familiar with navigating growth and diversity with a focus upon diminishing gender discrimination and bias. Moreover, DeFrank-Cole et al. (2014) acknowledged that mentoring and leadership development programs geared toward women are needed; yet, difficulties in locating a mentor persist (Haley & Jaeger, 2015), within what is recognized as a male dominated culture. Contrastingly, within a recent gender neutrality study, a significant disparity in female viewpoints were found related to their organizations voice and if the organization had an active approach to gender diversity (Jones, 2016).

The perceived contradiction between women and the typical leader role tends to create certain prejudices that causes people to think that leadership is more suited for men than women (Eagly et al., 2003)

Do you ever wonder why so few women take up leadership positions in the world? In the past, men had more power than women. Is this the main reason of why women should be treated unfairly today in the way of success? In fact, this is one of the causes that makes unfair treatment of women in society. Women are submissive to the life that their mothers have been through and do not really have courage to change the position of where they are standing and to change this inequitable treatment. In order to become a successful leader like men, women must be courageous of standing up in front of others. Also, a woman should find a good partner that supports her to change people’s thinking about stereotype

The results were surprisingly different from general belief. Of the leaders, 64% of them were men and the higher level the more men there were. Despite this, women scored higher than men in most categories and were evaluated as better overall leaders than men at all levels. Survey results prove that women are more nurturing and ethical leaders. Men are stereotyped as being strong-minded and vigorous, but against this belief women were actually demonstrated to be the more ambitious and go-getting leader.

For instance, to support the first argument, research should be conducted on women leaders of specific cultures, Smith and Reed initially presented statistics related to female employment. For instance, in the United States approximately 50% of management positions are held by women (Smith & Reed, 2010). Despite the growth in the number of women leadership roles, gender biases continue to exist. For example, in Pakistan women rarely receive support to become leaders because of the belief that they should be at home (Smith & Reed, 2010). As in the previous scenario, these biases are often the result of cultural norms/beliefs, therefore, differences within leadership structures will exist within each subgroup. Smith and Reed (2010) conclude this argument by emphasizing that a greater understanding of women’s leadership influence within each subgroup would “unleash the potential of all citizens in promoting national economic health and prosperity” (p.

As the author points out, the figures on women in leadership is staggering in disparity. The article takes time to focus on identifying and highlighting reasons what makes a successful leader. Having an opportunity to attend a leadership meeting, in which we discussed improving inclusion at my company, this article presented many of the same reasons that as a company we tried to understand, “Why do we not have more women in leadership?” This article really underscores that in order for a business to survive and grow or for that matter, any organization to flourish you need to find individuals that embody the above-mentioned leadership traits not just seniority.

A social gender orientation acts as a social-regulating thrust to lead others. In a collectivist culture, there is a social desire that a man ought to be a leader as opposed to a lady though in an independent culture there is not a huge contrast in gender orientation desires about turning into a leader. Accordingly, men are more prone to rise as the leaders of independent work groups in a collectivist culture. However, both men and women have a comparable probability of turning into a leader in a maverick culture (Peng & Cheng, 2016).

In the paper such remedies are talked about such as, increase awareness of the psychological drivers of prejudice toward female leaders; changing the long-hour norms; reduce subjective performance evaluations. And so on… these solutions are all tailored towards advancing women in leadership positions.

Gender and leadership? Leadership and gender? A journey through the landscape of theories start off by giving a statistical summary of percentages of women in higher echelon position in the workforce. With this information in the intro, the article quickly highlights the limited representation of women in exclusive positions in Fortune 500 companies. Next, the paper examines multiple theories why this problem exists in the workforce. The four theories examined are biology and sex; gender role; causal factors; and attitudinal drivers (Appelbaum et al, 2003, p. 44).