I have been lucky enough to never have to experience gender inequality. Growing up I had both men and women teachers, coaches, and friends. Even in the sport of cheerleading, men were always welcome and were not treated any differently than women. Gender inequality was something that I never thought about until recently, when a friend of mine graduated from college. He graduated with a degree in mechanical engineering, and pursued a career in the engineering field. He has discussed many of his experiences with me, and has even said that sometimes he feels women are put into leadership roles not because of their knowledge and ability, but because of the need to meet diversification standards.
Being a woman, I understand the importance of gender equality. However I do believe that the gender gap that exists today can be supported by the pipeline theory in Northouse. (2013) The pipeline theory proposes that the reason why women do not hold as many leadership positions as men is because they have not held leadership positions for as long as men and have not become part of the natural promotion process. I feel as though this theory is valid in the engineering world. The number of women in the engineering field in the past was extremely small as compared to men. Women simply were not there to be promoted into the leadership roles like men.
In today’s world, the advocacy and stress placed on gender equality is increasing. Organizations that help support and address the issue of gender inequality have been established, such as the Society of Women Engineers. The Society of Women Engineers created a Corporate Partnership Council, where they partner with many major companies and share information about the best equality initiatives, practices, and steps to take to ensure gender equality. A lot of great things have resulted from organizations such as the Society of Women Engineers, however there is a downside.
Corporate partners must ensure that there are opportunities for women to grow within their companies. This may lead upper leadership to place women in management positions because of their gender, not because of their knowledge or ability. When companies have more women in leadership roles they appear to be more diverse and will be viewed more favorably by the public. There may be alternative motives behind why companies place women in the roles that they do, which will lead to negative performances. In turn, the company will suffer.
I believe that equality is necessary, but it must be achieved under the basis of knowledge, ability, and background. If a man or woman is deserving of a leadership role, they should be given it. If they are not qualified, they should not be placed in a leadership role based on gender alone.
References:
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2013). PSYCH 485 Lesson 13: Leadership and Diversity. Retrieved on April 9, 2013, from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp13/psych485/003/content/13_lesson/01_page.html
I found your blog post to be insightful, Kaitlin. I like how you presented your argument with an appeal to merit and qualifications, as opposed to gender, as a basis for promotion.
I’m wondering, however, if objective merit is realistic standard with subjective people. For example, there are many biases that are introduced on both an individual, and a cultural level. For example, when myths are given legitimacy within a given culture, they tend to become self-reinforcing as a social norm (PSU, 2013). Once set in place, these norms can be incredibly difficult to re-cast.
Furthermore, the studies pertaining to the lesson material made it appear extremely difficult for women to advance, even in our more diverse socio-economic climate. For example, the studies performed by Eagly demonstrate that the basis for how we screen and select leaders is skewed and does not appear to be distribute these coveted leadership positions in a just manner.
In all actuality, women seem to have to tip toe in areas where men have traditionally dominated (Northouse, 2013). They can’t appear to risk taking, but they have to show some degree of risk tolerance, they can’t act masculine, but they also can’t be too feminine, due to feminine roles being negatively perceived in terms of leadership (PSU, 2013).
While I completely support your statements, that people should be considered for leadership roles on the basis of merit, regardless of race or gender, I’m not convinced this approach will ever be humanly possible.
References
Northouse, P.G. (2013). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Penn State World Campus (2013). PSYCH 485 Lesson 13: Leadership and Diversity. Retrieved on April 14, 2013, from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/sp13/psych485/003/content/13_lesson/06_page.html