While learning about culture and leadership, I reflected on my own company’s status regarding women in leadership positions. Northouse states that only “14.6% of women occupy executive officer positions” among Fortune 500 companies (Northouse, 2016). While this is likely the case overall, my company, which is listed as one of the Fortune 500, has 20% of their executive officer positions filled by females. Granted, the 20% is just 2, but it is obvious the company is above the average.
Looking deeper into the next layer of senior officers, I found the number of women jumped to 34% (31 of 91). Next, skipping further down the hierarchy and looking at a segment of second-level managers, I discovered the number of women in those leadership positions to be 37.5% (18 of 48). This real-time data supports the fact that women are underrepresented in upper-level management.
As Northouse explains, there are three explanations for this underrepresentation: 1) women have less education, training and work experience than men, 2) women have different leadership styles and are less effective at leading than men and 3) prejudice and discrimination against women (Northouse, 2016). While all three of these reasons are valid at least to a degree, why, in today’s environment, is this the case?
We know that women have just as much opportunity to obtain an education and training as men, all other things being equal. In fact, this course is comprised of 62% women (13 of 21). Women also can gain work experience just as men do – I work with several women that have more years of service than I do, so that alone shows women have experience. Regarding leadership styles, all men do not have the same leadership style as we have seen in our textbook – some are servant leaders, some transformational, some are authentic and so on. Therefore, we could expect women to have various leadership styles, yet they cannot seem to “break the glass ceiling”.
This leaves prejudice and discrimination as most likely the main reason for women not rising to the upper ranks of leadership. When leaders are selected to fill an executive officer position, most likely the interview and selection process is one that happens in a vacuum. That is, CEOs making the selection do not adhere to standard hiring policies that typically urge managers to hire for a diverse team and this could lead to some gender bias (Northouse, 2016).
Would a change in interviewing and selection practices for executive officers be to help women break the glass ceiling? Perhaps it would, but the question then becomes “Can the CEO work effectively with the person chosen?” Maybe it is the prerogative of a CEO to get to choose whom he wishes to place in the officer positions, but maybe it is time we look at using panel interviews of lower-level leaders to identify and fill executive officer level positions to help women overcome the glass ceiling.
References
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
tvm5502 says
Hello Matthew,
Seeing that twenty percent of your executive leadership team are female, I think it would have been interesting to read what impact you feel that has had for you and your co-workers – what effect if any? Do you or any other view them any differently than the other members? Applying what you have learned about gender inequality and the workplace, how do you feel either of them got to where they are now?
I have to disagree with your statement that all three of the aforementioned explanations for women’s underrepresentation is true to some extent. Number two on the list was that they have different leadership styles and are less effective at leading than men. While women exhibit more of a participative, democratic leadership style, all studies point to a women’s style being more effective now than ever before (Northouse, 2016).
I also might offer that instead of introducing hiring panels to overcome gender bias toward female candidates, that we educate those in hiring positions (executive team or others) to self-reflect to uncover if they may be unconsciously discriminating against women or minorities. Northouse (2016) states that we suffer from stereotypes and prejudice that studies have shown that hold women back from positions of leadership. Along with this, we give credence to outdated social dominance orientation which gives way to in-group favoritism where that male CEO will favor other males, like him (Penn State, 2018).
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications, Inc
Pennsylvania State University World Campus. (2018). Lesson 13: Leadership and diversity. PSYCH485: Leadership in work settings. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1942231/modules/items/25010919
Lilian De Sousa Rego says
Hi Matthew,
“There is no empirical support for the argument that women are less educated than men are or that they are more likely to quit their jobs or choose the mommy track. There is evidence that women assume significantly more domestic responsibility, which contributes to less work experience and more career interruptions” (Northouse, 2016, page 419).
In general women are programed different than men, women gets very emotional sometimes and it is very difficult to reason, as Northouse mentions women assume so much domestic responsibility that it ends up getting in the way of the professional development. Besides that women encounter organizational barriers that in mostly represents the lack of accommodation for women support, interpersonal barriers that represents the limitation of socialization between the genders “think about deals that happen on the golf course or in the locker room after a game of racquetball”. (Psych 485, Lesson 13: Leadership and Diversity, Barriers), and personal barriers.
Our lesson also talks about the disadvantage of not having a white male mentor for women. Well that statement alone shows me very clear that women is not the only one in disadvantage and hitting the glass ceiling.
In actuality as a woman, I really appreciated your blog post and the effort that you had show in advocating for our cause. As a woman that carries a conservative political view, I have to agree with the statement of Sigmund Freud that “when you meet a human being, the first distinction you make is “male or female” and you are accustomed to make that distinction with unhesitating certainty.” (1965, p.141) (Northouse, 2016, page 397).
Looking back at the history of the creation, when God created the woman he referred to her as a helper suitable for the men. (Genesis 2:18). If the women in our society would just work along with the men in order to achieve a common goal for the sake of the followers, it is very probably that the men would take the women and their contributions passed the glass ceiling, I know that my opinion as just as good as the next, but I wanted to share my thoughts.
Thank you for your kindness and consideration towards the women in leadership, it means a lot.
Best regards,
Lilian Rego
cyh5382 says
Based on the information in the text, I agree with the notion that prejudice is the likely indicator for the gender gap. Like you stated, today’s women are often well-qualified for positions and there is no obvious reason why more of them are not getting promoted, other than a personal quality like that of gender. I don’t necessarily know that this is done out of the malice that seems to so often be portrayed because so much of the information seems to speak for the positivity of men, rather than the downfalls of being a woman (Northouse, 2016). This leads me to believe that this prejudice lies within men sort of unconsciously viewing other men as having those innate qualities that are perceived to represent leadership.
I found a really interesting article from the 1980’s, the decade from which many of our current leaders’ careers would have been shaped, that found men to be more of the hero-type. It also found that men generally provided more help, and women were given more help (Eagley, 1986). So thinking back to the psychodynamic concepts, we might argue that this mindset has shaped the way men perceive themselves versus their female counterparts. This is not to say that they don’t see women as capable, but that these other men have a stronger ability to provide guidance and work with less. Going into an interview with these preconceptions, they might be picking out certain pieces that support what they already believe. One might say that this could fall under the gender differences portion of the labyrinth, but it doesn’t because its based on fallacy. This fallacy is what leads to prejudice, not against women, but in favor of men.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Eagly, A. H., & Crowley, M. (1986). Gender and helping behavior: A meta-analytic review of the social psychological literature. Psychological Bulletin, 100(3), 283-308. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1037/0033-2909.100.3.283