Women display more transformational behaviors, while men are associated with more position-based and formal leadership. Men are believed to manifest command and control, while women facilitate cooperation and collaboration. Women encompass a distinctive set of capabilities and tend to lead with effective styles. They encourage commitment, interaction and involvement. Contemporary views of good leadership emphasize the ability to empower. Organizations can utilize these effective leadership styles to their competitive advantage. Among U.S. organizations that have adopted transformational leadership styles are Google and Facebook. These Silicon Valley giants hired women executives to stimulate innovation and progressive change (McLean 2014).
Not all women, however, exhibit this transformational style. Similarly, many men do. Advocating the advantages of feminine leadership in a way perpetuates a problem. Stating that men and women lead with distinctive styles promotes gender differences. It reinforces expectations concerning appropriate female behavior. Women are naturally seen to be different. Difference itself is a problem. The goal is to acknowledge that men and women are the same and deserve similar rights and responsibilities.
To this end, some organizations in the United States have adopted an “androgynous view” of leadership roles (Eagly and Carley 2003, 826). It includes a wide repertoire of masculine and feminine behaviors. Marissa Mayer, Yahoo’s CEO, points out that she is “gender-oblivious” (McLean 2014, 72). “She has credited her obliviousness with her success” (McLean 2014, 72). Mayer was one of Google’s highest-ranking women prior to becoming the youngest woman, at 37, to run a Fortune 500 company. She also refuses to be stereotyped and never noticed that she stood out as Google’s first female engineer. Being empathetic, decisive and having the ability to influence others are some of the modern characterizations of great leaders.
Women don’t make better leaders than men, or worse. But there are patterns of inequality which stand in way of women’s paths to executive roles. In American organizations, equality is not a distant goal. There is an upward bump in women's representation among corporate officers. Women in the United States have come a long way. Thanks to the Makers project, one of the initiatives that focus on issues of American women, leadership, and the workplace, a number of conferences and networking events are launching as part of the growing women’s movement. The Makers effort, originally a series of documentaries about women who make America, will soon become a global brand built around women’s empowerment (McGregor 2014). Sheryl Sandberg, the chief operating officer of Facebook, is one of the women of distinction who was featured in a Makers documentary. After the wide success of her first book, Lean In, Sandberg is writing the second book for university graduates and is introducing “Lean In Circles” to college campuses (McGregor 2014). These networking groups are formed to open the dialogue on subjects like negotiation techniques and body language (Luscombe 2013, 42).
During negotiations, women pull back when they should lean in (Sandberg 2013, 44). According to the norms of behavior associated with masculinity and femininity, women tend to be deferential, which appears to be powerless and weak. Women have internalized the norms around gender and work. This internal regulation prevents them from self-promotion and using assertive speech when it comes to bargaining and negotiations. There is a tendency for women to equalize status, demonstrate responsiveness, and support others. It is an internal cognitive matter that is expressed in behavior. It is a mindset that translates into habits. Getting rid of the internal barriers that hold women back—the internal messages that say it is wrong to be outspoken, aggressive, and more powerful than men—is critical to gaining power (Sandberg 2013, 44).
Denying self-determination, in light of expectations, affects women’s chances of success. Each workplace situation brings up gendered expectations. Whether they lean in or pull back, women are automatically wrong regardless of how they respond to these expectations. Some women in positions of influence try to navigate the conflicting expectations, without deviance from norms of feminine behavior. A negotiation method, for example, that combines “niceness with insistence” is a creative way to attain a goal (Sandberg 2013, 48). Other female leaders seem to gain advantage by using competitiveness with cooperativeness, without appearing less caring or understanding. This technique, however, is a way of responding to expectations for femininity, like playing a role that is already scripted. In fact, most women hold each other accountable to appropriately manage their gender roles. Adhering to the norm meets the expectations, while departing from tendencies invites resistance. This type of gender compliance reinforces the binary expectations. The activity of managing the expectations is a self-defeating endeavor.
No comments:
Post a Comment