Stereotypes In Leadership Essay

Confidence, integrity, purpose, empowerment, determination, and courage. These are some of the many words associated with leadership. Regardless of gender, these words apply to all leaders. It is no longer a question of what women leaders are, but rather why there are not women leaders. Today’s society focuses on fulfilling leadership positions with males, not because females do not have the same skills and knowledge as men, but because people associate men with leaders. There are various daily obstacles that women face in the attempt towards leadership roles including prejudice beliefs, resistance due to stereotypes, leadership styles, family life demands and underinvestment in social capital. We have found that through depictions in the media, women are not seen as effective leaders in the same sense as men. These media findings and various research techniques provide evidence for the lack of female presence in leadership positions.

These perceptions however may not be true. According to organizational behavior scholars, ‘women are evaluated negatively when they adopt a stereotypically male leadership style and occupy traditionally male-dominated positions’. The employees in the case assume that Sally being a woman should be ‘nurturing and … care about their workers’ suggesting preconceived notions of how women should behave. This notion of stereotyping can result in misinterpretation of information because not all people are the same, and many in the same social category may demonstrate inconsistencies with the stereotype.

Much similar to the lack of fit model, Eagly and Karau (2002) have developed the role congruity theory of prejudice. In short, the theory suggests that prejudice against women as leaders stems from the incongruity between how people perceive women and how they perceive a leader. Comparable to Heilman (2001), they claim that gender roles contain two kinds of norms: descriptive and injunctive. Descriptive are consensual stereotypes about group members, while injunctive are expectations about what group members ought/would ideally do. Very similar to what has been explained in previous sections, men are perceived as agentic while women are perceived as communal. However, leaders are also ascribed agentic characteristics, thereby supporting the

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).

During the early history in America women were deprived of some of the many rights given to the male citizens. It has almost been a century since women were awarded the right to vote in the United States. It’s been half a century after the Equal Pay Act was established. “The Equal Pay act led to a reduction in the wage gap, but wage differences based on sex persist” (Korgen & Giraffe, 2015). Sadly, there is still a lot of prejudice towards women in the workplace. Bigotry towards women in the workplace has been dominant through the years. Many perceive women as being weak and not able to effectively provide their leadership duties in their workplaces due to their emotions (weaker sex). Positions in leadership are often given

"Women's advancement often stops short of the general management level" as a partial result of discrimination by white men in positions of power, which include the differences of developmental job assignments they are afforded (Ohlott 46). "Developmental job assignments have been found to be one of the most important factors in preparing both men and women for upper-level management positions" (Ohlott 46 - 47).If women do not experience these same job assignments, they may be less prepared than men for handling future upper-level management jobs. These types of job assignments lead to high-level positions, make managers more visible, and prepare them for future jobs. With men being in the top ranks of organizations in most cases, they are less likely to assign these challenging tasks to female subordinates (Ohlott 49). "Organizations more often move women into staff positions and out of functions central to a business" mainly because those making the staffing decisions are more interested in advancing their own careers (Ohlott 49).

Marie A. Chisholm-Burns states that “perhaps no sector has been more publicly scrutinized for its gender disparities than the corporate world” (312). While women tend to do most of the shopping for the household, they still lack the ability to voice their opinions about what can be done to improve consumption or shopping. USA Today recently wrote an article that was boldly named “Sexism in the Workplace is Worse Than You Thought” which talks about the gender bias women face in the workplace as they progress in their career (Chisholm-Burns 312). Since white males are considered superior in today’s society, diversity is hard to find in high-paying jobs. Because women face discrimination, many businesses struggle to reach their full potential. The glass ceiling is also very condescending and causes women to act negatively towards themselves. The discrimination in pay between men and women has caused many women to form anxiety or stress disorders, such as depression. It also causes women to not strive to be the best they can and because they struggle with this, the possibilities of having great women in leadership decreases even lower than it was originally. These low levels of female leaders also lack encouragement from good role models who would help them learn how to be a leader. If equality becomes a strong focus for corporations, then they should see a positive overall

Research on networking shows that women are less likely to choose partners with power and authority (Ibarra, 1992, 1993; McGuire, 2000). Lyness and Thompson (2000) found that both genders report different social and professional experiences in reaching top management. This study represents how gender stereotyping affects the women of the workplace and their struggle to reach upper management. Overall trying to bring awareness of gender stereotypes that are not being taken seriously.

This article reveals the disparities in the workplace due to gender stereotypes favoring men over women in executive positions. Women have a much more difficult path to obtain executive positions, and maintain them. This article helps by showing the number of high-level women in fortune 500 companies. U.S. Department of Labor indicates that women occupy more positions in executive and managerial roles. However, with closer examination of Fortune 500 companies, only two women occupy the position of CEO opposed to their

Vinkenburg, van Engen, Eagly, and Johannesen-Schmidt (2011) found that gender differences in communication style norms can also impact advancement in careers. While the differences in group collaboration and leadership styles between men and women may be trivial, and perception of gender-based leadership style is not. Women were shown to use more effective, leadership techniques then men. However, men were perceived as being slightly better leaders and more inspirational in the work setting, despite the fact that woman’s leadership styles tended to be more rounded. The perpetuation of gender bias in promotion decisions perpetuates the stereotype that men hold

In our society the need to talk about gender inequalities is of fundamental importance for men’s and women’s development. History has given us several examples of discrimination against women, such as the belief that women is less capable of occupying positions of power within competitive corporations. The institutionalization of women’s leadership in modern society continues to be founded on gender as the result of patriarchy. Such concept has placed women at a disadvantage in terms of employment opportunities in leadership positions. In the article, “Status process and the Institutionalization of Women as Leaders”, Jeffrey W. Lucas deliberates about society’s framework and the correlation that exists between gender and status within institutions.

When discussing inequality between genders, it is difficult to overlook opportunities that are withheld from women do to preconceptions of their ability to handing work that is traditionally practiced by men. "Many women report that men tend to dominate in mixed-gender work groups" (Distelhorst 24). Utilizing assertive characteristics in combination with sound judgment is important for proper leadership. According to Distelhorst, the ability to express one 's opinion is limited in business settings by the level of authority employees hold (26). As such, the ability of women to thrive in an environment described by Distelhorst is questionable. On the contrary, men may be expected to possess more positive

For my research question I will be asking: “How is America making progress on gender equity?” Fundamentally, I believe that women are still misrepresented, and are still facing many challenges in the workplace, especially in the business world. The gender stereotypes play a considerable role in the way the society sees women as leaders. However, it will be judicious to consider the small but noticeable changes that have been made over the past years concerning gender equality in the American workplace.

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).