The Role Of Gender And Its Effect On Leadership Styles

The studies observed that women tend to adopt a more transformational and participative initiative style while men were seen to embrace more dictatorial and disciplined styles (Eagly & Johnson, 1990). The research studies likewise found that the style chosen by most women for the most part ends up being helpful for authoritative adequacy, for the most part coordinating the arrangement of reward, inspiration, expectation, and eagerness among others (Mohr & Wolfram, 2008). These differences in gender leadership styles may influence the way the coach approaches his or her coaching method to be more effective. For example, women in leadership are described as having a softer verbal tone than men who often have a more authoritative tone (Mohr & Wolfram, 2008) which can be offensive if a coach uses an authoritative tone unnecessarily or constantly with a woman

Men leaders are often praised and rewarded when success comes their way, whereas women see success as coming with a cost (Luscombe, 2013). Data has shown that “success and likability are positively correlated for men and negatively correlated for women”, but this realization has led her to be a more powerful and thoughtful leader in her role (Luscombe, 2013). It explains why her female employees will negotiate hard for their clients, but not themselves, and why women are less eager to boast their accomplishments or go for higher leadership positions (Luscombe, 2013). Changing this way of thinking connects to what we have learned about leadership in class, specifically the fifth element of what leaders do best: encourage the heart (Management, 2017). If women feel appreciated, and like their ideas matter in the workplace, they are more likely to stay and succeed. Women are twice as likely to believe that their gender will make it harder to advance (Sandberg, 2015). Therefore, knowing this correlation between success and popularity as a manager completely changes the review on employees, especially women. Additionally, visions in companies fail when it becomes outdated (Management, 2017). It is becoming increasingly normal and essential for women to play a large role in the leadership of companies, and the gender bias is

Today, women are subjected to a high volume of ideas regarding what they should do with their lives and how they should behave. Society subjects women to hostility for choosing to work instead of having children or being a working mother. This contrasts women who choose to stay at home that are subjected to mockery for not doing enough with their life and supporting traditional gender roles. What happens when these ideas and concepts are discussed with a woman who happens to be a mother and the president of an extremely profitable credit company? By narrowing and investigating the ideas of women leaders as individuals and not as a whole, it shows that each leader is unique and shaped by their experience. In this paper, a specific woman leader’s opinions and experiences will be discussed compared to multiple theories about women and leadership; her name is Pam Krank and she is the President of The Credit Department, Incorporated. Her company is involved in “credit management outsourcing” and “managing trade receivables for companies’ worldwide” (Krank 1993 n.p.). Pam oversees many employees, some working from a central office in Saint Paul, Minnesota and some who work from home. Pam is working in a masculine dominated field and must be able to navigate leadership in both a masculine and feminine sense. Pam is forced to navigate murky waters because she works in a masculine field with predominantly male dominated companies. The concept of opting-out closely aligns with

This journal seeks to discuss recent identifications and explanations of gender differences in leadership, behaviour & effectiveness in organizations. The models are reviewed based on their contribution and arguments, contextual issues of international and national as well, stereotype and perception of superior and subordinate roles are reviewed and discussed. Rational differences are reviewed and resolved in the context of gender in the perceptions of leadership effectiveness.

The feminism leadership theory provides some insights on the challenges I face as a woman leader in wanting to be transformational. Women have been and still are expected to manifest certain qualities in their thinking and action. These are culturally engraved qualities, assumed to be the identifying traits of femininity, and include friendliness, kindness, and unselfishness. These expectations are sharply different from the agentic qualities expected of “masculinity” and men, such as assertiveness and instrumental competence (Eagly et al., 2003). Stereotypical beliefs remain strong so that, when working as leaders or managers, women (and men) are expected to behave as culture defines them on the basis of their gender alone. Thus it is anticipated

In Koehane’s book Thinking About Leadership she asked a very interesting question. Does Gender Make a Difference when it comes to leadership? And why is there still such a disparity between men and women in positions of leadership? So does gender make a difference? The answer is off course no. So what then explains the disparity between the sexes? Leadership styles might be the culprit in this case. In Koehane’s book she asked her fellow classmates at their forty-fifth class reunion a simple question: “Do women lead differently from men?” And every single participant replied yes (Koehane 4). The theory is the women in a leadership position will lead in a more feminine way. That they are more compassionate and prefer the use of group work as

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.

Gender stereotypes “reflect percievers’ observations of what people do in daily life” (Eagly and Steffan, 1984) and remain if perceivers continue to observe a certain group engaged in specific activities, which then turn into assumptions that the group is able to perform such tasks. When it comes to gender roles, Heilman (2001) suggests that there are two roles that either gender can possess, agentic or communal. Agentic behaviour is usually associated with men, and portrays the idea of being achievement orientated and taking charge (Solomon, Bamossy, Askegaard, and Hogg, 2013). Additionally, leadership and manager attributes such as, problem solving, risk taking, and being active are associated with an agentic, masculine figure (Heilman, 2001). Women, on the other hand, show communal attributes that are associated with care taking, helpful, and relationship orientated. Sczesny’s work (2003) introduced the common assumption that managerial positions are male dominated, “think manager – think male”, and crisis situations are associated with females (Haslam & Ryan, 2007).

Though we are similarly built, the physiological differences between male and female humans are quite easy to spot. Men and women differ in shape, size and reproductive organs; there is no question about that. Observing behavioral differences between men and women requires observation, statistical evidence and research. To accurately evaluate male and female behavioral differences, we must first understand perception, and to understand perception one must study how behavior is observed and interpreted. This opens up a new realm of possibilities, since societies throughout the world differ on their expected roles for male and female. For objectivity, this report will focus

Understanding the processes that cognitive lights stereotyping causes of the phenomena studied by organizational psychology underlying. Research on gender and leadership focuses on both college students and executives in various business settings. A common theme concerns the idea that a good leader is "model described incompatible male with feminine behavior, sometimes thought of as" think-Manager. For example, to provoke some settings pronounced stereotypes. If the expected leadership style of an organization at a given hora direct, exacerbate uncaring, or from top to bottom, traditionally masculine behaviors can be expected by executives. This expectation May effects of stereotypes of women who hold that competence and warmth of personality are dichotomous, making it difficult for women in leadership positions a balance that effectively to find in this organization.

“Don’t just stand for the success of other women – insist on it.” (Gail Blanke, 1999, p.138)

The hypothesis of this paper must be defended from both sides of the argument in order to be properly investigated. Anyone has the potential to be a leader, be that male or female. Leaders are not born to one gender or the other specifically. A leader develops an identity through relational and social processes and comes to see oneself through these processes. This would apply to either a woman or a man. If one receives positive validation for one’s self-view as a leader, it bolsters self-confidence and increases one’s motivation to lead (Chan & Drasgow, 2001; Kark & van Dijk, 2007). As one’s leadership opportunities and capacity to advance in leadership grows, the likelihood of advancement and endorsement within an organization grows as well. The recognition and respect gained by these experiences, further fuels the search for new opportunities, growth, and so on. These qualities and opportunities are available to either gender. Contrary to this, if one fails to receive validation for leadership attempts diminishes, so does self-confidence and the motivation to seek out other opportunities or to experiment, and take on new leadership roles (Day et al., 2009) thus weakening one’s

Does gender affect the ability of an individual to become an effective leader? Some researchers believe that effective leaders are just born while others believe that effective leadership can be learned. But few of these researchers discuss the difference that gender may make in becoming good leaders. When we take a look back through history, we can see that the evaluation of women leaders was slow. Today, only 2.4 percent (Gettings, Johnson, Brunner, & Frantz, 2009) of the Fortune 500 Company 's are lead by women which is an increase from the 1.2 percent (www.money.cnn.com) of female Chief Executive Officers in 2002. The gender differences in the corporate world posses several issues for the Human Resource Managers such as management

Chemers perceived that there are three theoretical explanations for the main differences between male and female leadership. One difference, the most obvious, is biological differences, which is based around hormones and temperament. The second difference is culturally diversities. This tells that socialized roles are varied per culture. The final difference is structurally determined. The different sexs have very diverse organizational structures (Eagly, Makhijani, & Klonsky, 1992; Chemers, 2000). Placing practical differences aside, the essential problem with women leadership roles is actually seen in the attitudes of those around them. The attitudes people have towards women when they are the ones making decisions are a perception with no objectivity, formally known as a stereotype.

Over the centuries, femininity has been stereotyped as reliant, subservient and conforming, and hence women have been seen as lacking in leadership qualities. The male bias is reflected in the false conception of leadership as mere command or control. “As leadership comes properly to be seen as a process of leaders engaging and mobilizing the human needs of followers, women will be more readily recognized as leaders and men will change their own leadership styles” (Burns, 1978, p. 50). Gender differences in leadership has been one of the most intense studies, researchers have been trying to figure out why they’re very, few women leaders. Although there have been more women entering the work force, the leadership ratio is still not