Lesson 13 touches on what observers and workers think of women leaders and how they compare to men. Alice Eagly conducted three meta-analyses on gender and leadership during a ten-year period from 1992 to 2002, and the findings suggested that women leaders should not act too much like men, nor should they act too much like women (PSU 2013). Working a thin line between those two polarized ends, has there been more acceptance of women leaders since the meta-analyses were conducted?
A recent Gallup poll found that 35% of respondents would rather have a male boss than a female boss, 23% would prefer a female boss, and 41% had no preference (Gallup 2013). This is a significant change from when these questions were first posed in 1953, when 66% of respondents preferred a male boss and only 5% preferred a female boss (Gallup 2013). However, the percentages have been fairly steady over recent years.
(photo credit: Gallup)
Having worked for excellent male and female bosses, I am encouraged that the majority of respondents don’t prefer one gender over the other. Acceptance of women leaders is still trending upwards, albeit very slowly, as it has been for most of the timeline. When drilling down into the data, I was surprised to see that 40% of female respondents preferred a male leader, whereas only 29% of men preferred a male leader.
(photo credit: Gallup)
Since the rate of preference of female leadership has been rather stagnant, what can be done to improve the acceptance of women leaders at a quicker rate? The commentary for Lesson 13 discussed many barriers that can be addressed, but one barrier in particular I think merits particular attention. The Lesson 13 commentary listed “lack of white male mentors” as an interpersonal barrier, but a mentorship may not be enough. Mary Davis Holt is an author and a partner of a consulting firm that promoted women and workplace advancement. She proposes that sponsorship is much more effective than a mentorship (daSilva 2012). What’s the distinction between the two? Mentorship involves one person showing another the ropes of the job and providing career advice, whereas sponsorship adds a dimension of advocacy (daSilva 2012). For women to be represented more in the highest positions and affect workplace culture, it is immensely advantageous to have someone sponsoring and advocating them to aid in obtaining higher positions. This sponsorship can give women the support to be successful, overcome all organizational, interpersonal, and personal barriers, and break through the glass ceiling. As more women become successful in the executive ranks, the broad perception of women leaders will change and there will be a higher rate of acceptance of women leaders.
REFERENCES
daSilva, J. (2012). Q-and-A with Mary Davis Holt: The state of women in leadership. SmartBlog on Leadership. Retrieved from http://smartblogs.com/leadership/2012/08/27/the-state-of-women-in-leadership/.
Newport, F. and Wilke, J. (2013). Americans Still Prefer a Male Boss. Gallup Economy. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/165791/americans-prefer-male-boss.aspx.
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2013). Lesson 13: Leadership and Diversity. Retrieved from https://courses.worldcampus.psu.edu/fa13/psych485/002/content/13_lesson/printlesson.html.
EDWARD JOSEPH POLIFKO says
The statistics you provided are very insightful, Nick. Of personal interest to me is the statistic that Republicans prefer male leadership far more than Democrats.
Regardless of that fact, I can relate very well to what you say about the Air Force, being a veteran myself. In the hospital I worked in, the mixture of cultures was certainly shocking at first to me, as it may be to any 19 year old straight out of basic training. The longer I was in the Air Force, I grew to appreciate the diversity around me. People from different sides of the country, with different backgrounds, beliefs, religions and stories to tell.
What I like about the Air Force, and the military in general, is that there was seemingly no outward prejudice, no insubordination towards leadership, and certainly no favoritism, as all promotions were based on merit and test scores. After getting out of the Air Force, I looked for federal employment, hoping to mimic what I had lost leaving the military. What I got instead, is a system that rewards brown-nosers, promotes solely from a “friend network”, and has a track record for keeping the laziest employees around.
With such an antiquated system in place, it should come as no surprise that most management at my installation is white, middle-aged males, who have no experience or education in management. This lack of diversity keeps us in a primitive era, unable to think outside of the box or look to new opportunities. More female leadership in higher positions may just bring in a new perspective for a lot of employees, though I doubt many of them want anything to change at this point in their careers.
DEEDRA LEE HARDIN says
You may be interested in reviewing another research study by Uma Jogulu and Glenice Wood (2007). This study looked at leadership styles of managerial women in two specific, but very different, cultures: Malaysia and Australia. They were curious about the effectiveness of leadership styles adopted by women and whether gender differences in peer evaluators were affecting these effectiveness ratings. Members of the workforce in both countries responded as follows.
In terms of leadership styles, women in your organization are not as effective as leaders compared with their male colleagues, equally as effective as leaders compared with their male colleagues, or more effective as leaders compared with their male colleagues.
In Malaysia, the men rated their female colleagues:
38% said they were not as effective
57% said they were equally as effective
2% said they were more effective.
The women rated their female colleagues:
23% said women were not as effective
67% said they were equally as effective
7% said they were more effective
In Australia, the men rated:
17% said women were not as effective
82% said women were equally as effective
1% said women were more effective.
The women rated their female colleagues:
11% said they were not as effective
71% said they were equally as effective
11% said they were more effective
The findings of this study suggested that culture has an effect on the perception of women as leaders because stereotyping continues as evidenced by the high negative rating of Malaysian men on women in leadership positions. This, obviously, would hinder their attempts at career advancement as men are still placed in positions of authority in all levels of society. The ratings in Australia are not as strongly negative and do reflect that culture’s more balanced view of the roles of men and women (Jogulu & Wood, 2007).
References
Jogulu, U.D. & Wood, G.J. (2007). A cross-cultural study into peer evaluations of women’s leadership effectiveness. Leadership & Organizational Development Journal, 29(7), 600-616. Doi: 10.1108/014377310810906344
Northouse, P. (2013). Leadership: Theory and practice, 6th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.