In the United States it is not uncommon to cover the topics of gender and culture during different renditions of the same tired possibly ineffective, mandatory work training. When subjects like tolerance, sensitivity, diversity, and those alike come up, I often feel like there needs to be two separate conversations about gender and culture. While both of these subjects are important, they differ greatly in the methods of addressing issues surrounding. I find it interesting how truly opposing these two paths are.
When talking about gender in today’s organizational climate it might be nice if the biggest concern was a list of confusing, newly created pronouns longer than your arm. I should have prefaced that with the announcement that I have no problem with people having different approaches to gender. There always needs to be respect paid to the individual regarding their gender, or gender choice, but organizationally speaking I feel we may in a way, want to get away from gender associations. It could be an ethical pursuit to make an attempt to de-gender things as they concern with leadership. The idea that men are more agentic, and therefore more suited for leadership positions than women (Northouse, 2016) when explained on its own merits (or lack thereof) should fall apart under scrutiny. The idea that women are more communal (Northouse, 2016) may seem to be a positive stereotype, but in the context of leadership it is a detriment that contradicts the agentic characteristics blindly assigned to men (Northouse, 2016). The best thing to do as a society would be do de-gender as much as possible; make a conscious effort to think about the unconscious associations and prejudices we may hold when we think about leadership. It would be a monumental effort, but if people had the presence of mind to adjust their ideas behind femininity and masculinity, male and female, or men and women, there could be an improvement from our current position. While it is the best course of action to de-gender the leadership conversation how would that work for the issues surrounding culture?
When talking about culture we are referring to “learned beliefs, values, rules, norms, symbols, and traditions that are common to a group of people” (Northouse, 2016). While the approach to managing gender issue in leadership may be to take gender out entirely, the approach to managing issues surrounding culture and leadership may be opposing. If one tried to make leadership decisions without any consideration of culture, results would often be undesirable. There are a number dimensions of culture (Northouse, 2016) that influence how a person thinks. The Global Leadership and Organizational Behavioral Effectiveness research program, identified nine cultural dimensions (Northouse, 2016, p. 436). If a leader were to understand these dimensions as they relate to cultures, they could understand quite a bit about other’s actions. While the ability to explain the actions of others is always going to be advantageous, I feel there are bigger advantages. One of those advantages is in being able to move forward understanding how your actions will be interpreted by other cultures, allowing for less conflict, translating to potentially preferable outcomes. There is good reason to understand these dimensions of culture and how they effect the best course of action.
While I do agree that these subjects should both be serious considerations when talking about leadership, I feel that the way they are handled are about as opposite as it gets. I am proposing that we de-gender leadership on a large scale, the whole way down to people’s unconscious associations with femininity and masculinity. While I propose that when it comes to gender and leadership we try to wipe the slate as clean as possible, doing the same when it comes to culture, and leadership would be irresponsible and undesirable. When it comes to making the best leadership decisions the more you know about other cultures the better off you will be. I find it ironic how often these dynamic subjects are often part of the same ritualistic, organizational awareness training.
References
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership, Theory and Practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
cas5184 says
Hi Erik,
I enjoyed your blog and felt that it was very well thought out and presented. To be honest, as a woman, the whole gender debate is frustrating. I’ve heard the debate time and time again and though there has been progress, I still feel that for many, they will always feel superior to other genders. With that being said, I’ve never truly considered degendering and on paper, it sounds ideal. Removing stereotypes, divisions, and other barriers that separate genders would in hope, eliminate the debate altogether. However, this would present some difficult situations.
First, one would have to assume that all members of the workplace are on board. Without full compliance and acceptance, the program would fail. Second, and as you mentioned, there would be cultural boundaries. Cultural boundaries will always be present in the workplace and diversity is, of course, something that should be celebrated, however, the complete degendering of the workplace would be a great undertaking when considering certain cultures with strict gender roles. Teaching acceptance and other techniques may be less time consuming and result in a more positive reception.
Finally, you have to consider that removing gender identities in the workplace would be troublesome regarding human resources. How could you implement those policies without some type of discrimination? While you’re not telling someone they can’t be male/female/trans/etc.. you are also removing a huge part of one’s identity. Consider a woman on maternity leave, how would a degenderized workplace address that? Separate policies would mean that degenderizing has failed. Ultimately, different genders have different needs. Tailoring all policies to be neutral would be nearly impossible, and again, likely in some way discriminatory.
Picturing a workplace where no one identifies by a gender, and roles are irrelevant would be perfect. However, we can’t simply put blinders on and be free from seeing gender. We are often molded by our gender and regardless of how accepting we are from others, we see it. Degendering the workplace seems like a simple and rash solution to a much bigger problem, which is, the inability to see potential regardless of gender. Rather than remove a huge part of one’s identity from the workplace, why don’t we spend more time delving deeper into the real issue of gender and leadership: bias, prejudice, and the consistent acceptance of them in the workplace.
-Christine