Saturday 29 September 2012

Women Leaders, Overlooked for Chief Executive Positions


By: Cedric Moore Jr.
Catalyst (a leading nonprofit organization) research indicates that women continue to be underrepresented in top corporate leadership positions. Although the aforementioned tracked women executives in Fortune 500, this pattern appears to be prevalent in the human services field as well. After World War II, women began to transcend from traditional female roles and became an essential part of the workforce. Today, women continue to prove they are capable leaders, holding a high number of mid-level manager positions and worthy of equal opportunities provided to their male counterparts.

This in an era that seems to promote diversity, leadership, equal opportunity, and fair labor. However, in the corporate officer ranks, Catalyst found that parity between the gender groups would take forty years for women to achieve the same level as male counterparts. In the human services field, women are more likely to occupy direct care and middle management positions rather than top management positions even though there are more women than men employed in this field.

It is possible that women have lower self-efficacy about top managerial positions than men due to the messages given to women about their abilities as leaders. An assumption of discrepancy in numbers of female versus male top executive is the assumed belief that women do not have the right leadership style for these positions. Numerous studies show that females who are perceived to have masculine traits are less liked but more respected by subordinates. For example, P. Bradley found that female leaders who displayed masculine traits were not well liked by peers. C. Ridgeway and D. Diekema found that female leaders who modeled masculine traits received negative evaluations as leaders.

Contrary to the perception that female gender traits are not associated with effective leadership, research shows there are actually very small actual differences, if any, in the leadership styles of males and females. G. Powell did not find any significant differences between male and female managers in task-oriented and people-orientated behavior, perceived effectiveness, or subordinates’ responses to them. With this being the case, the glass ceiling must still exist.

Leadership Styles
Leadership theorists suggest there is not one definitive style that works better than others. Styles of leaders may differ depending on the situation. Situational leadership is based on maturity levels of groups and their leader’s ability to adapt to their level. During functional leadership, group members themselves take on certain leadership activities and/or responsibilities. Emphasis is placed on how an organization is led rather than who has been formally assigned to the leadership role.

Transactional leadership is based on mutual gains between the employee and supervisor or agency. The early stages of transactional leadership occur during the negotiation of the contract; when the employee is provided a salary or other benefits and the company expects returns such as extra work on special projects and loyalty. Transactional leaders operate on the premise; if it is not broken do not fix it. Exceeding expectations secures praise and reward, while performing below standards requires some kind of corrective action. This type of leadership is based on contingency and is only effective when both parties have something the other wants.

Transformational leaders often have a vision for the organization and use their own energetic personality to make their followers also believe in that vision. Leaders communicate and model their values to their followers. Leaders also use charismatic methods to attract people to their values. Despite numerous studies, there was no difference between female and male managers’ self-rating of transformational leadership traits. Research continues to be divided on leadership styles involving similarities and differences between male and female leaders.

Glass Ceiling
Glass ceiling is defined by Webster as “an intangible barrier within the hierarchy of a company that prevents women from obtaining upper level positions.” Although this barrier is invisible, just how visible is it to the naked eye? Employees of an organization are reflective of the organization as an entity. Ask yourself: if Virginia Community Services Boards employ more women than men, why are only 20 percent (one woman is serving as the acting CEO) of the CEO’s female? In a book review of Climbing the Corporate Ladder authored by Kathleen Archambeau, Tom Van Riper of Forbes, cited “hitting the glass ceiling can do more than give you a headache; it could give you a permanent head injury.” According to Catalyst, 2.8% of Fortune 500 Companies have women in the position of CEO.

According to M. Tam, there are Fortune 500 companies with customers that are predominantly female but failed to recognize that having women on the leading team would increase their productivity and effectiveness of their organizations. U. S. Department of Labor Women’s Bureau reported there are 68 million women working in today’s workforce and only 16 percent earn six-figure salaries. Research has shown a substantial difference in pay wages between the genders. In 2003, Mary Kay Cosmetics reached annual revenues of 1.8 billion dollars, employed more than one million Independent Beauty Consultants, and was one of the top sellers of skin care and color cosmetics in the world (Frankel, 2007). Mary Kay along with several other successful women proved that women are capable of being CEO’s and are very capable leaders.

Self-Efficacy
Self- efficacy is the belief in one’s own ability to master a task. Could this be a reason women choose to remain in “feminine” dominated fields? J. Bridges believed women feared failure in male dominated fields and this is why they chose to remain in a traditional field. High levels of self-efficacy are an indicator of success. Research supports women who rated higher on a masculinity scale reported greater self-efficacy. The correlation between high self-efficacy and masculine traits appears to be a blue print for success as a leader.

Scholars have researched self efficacy in early childhood in hopes of collecting data to establish a baseline of indicators. Some studies have focused on gender-based jobs seeking a correlation between the types of jobs individuals are open to and the types of jobs that satisfy their needs. Kimura found that play activities and cognitive patterns correlated to male hormone levels in both sexes. Susan Michie and Debra Nelson indicated high levels of androgens found in females made them highly likely to play with traditionally male identified toys.
Work – Life Balance
While women continue to work hard and pursue shattering the glass ceiling, how are they able to manage family and work? Research has identified family commitments and stereotypes as an indicator contributing to the lack of female CEO’s. Traditionally, women tended to view family as their first priority although they were and remain an integral part of the workplace. Because a woman wants to pursue her career to the highest does not mean she cannot maintain her same commitment to her family. A. Eagly and L. Carli found more time is being spent by married mothers towards primary childcare per week than they did in earlier generations (12.9 hours of lose interaction versus 10.6 hours) while fathers are also investing more time than in the past (6.5 hours versus 2.6 hours).

US Labor Department’s Women Bureau announced initiatives to enhance work/life balance and wage discrimination. “U. S. Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis announced several issues designed to end wage discrimination while improving pay equity and work/life balance (U.S. Department of Labor News Release, July 20, 2010).” According to the U.S. Department of Labor June 2010 Report, women who were full-time wage and salary workers in 2009, had weekly earnings of about 80 percent of the $819 median for their male counterparts. Comparative earnings data in 1979 found women earned 62 percent as much as men. Women employed full time in management, business, and financial jobs earned the highest median weekly earnings of any major occupational category.

The Department of Labor Current Populations Survey found that women have fewer years of work experience, are more likely to work part time, work fewer hours per year and leave the labor force for longer periods of time than men. Could this be the reason for the lack of female CEO’s? R. Madden mentioned women must be able to operate independently, be a team player, take risk without making waves and participate in after hour’s activities.

Conclusion
Research on leadership styles continue to be divided on what style is best associated with female leaders as well as the low number of women sitting at the highest seat in their organization. Generation by generation, women continue to make major strides and tap away at the glass ceiling. For women leaders at major corporations, what helped set them apart? When will the ceiling shatter? What will it take?

New initiatives supported by the White House and strong community movements led by Women Organizations continue to pick up momentum. Although the glass ceiling has major cracks, the study of self-efficacy is vital as women continue to pursue the seat at the front of the table. One thing to remember is no matter male or female – if you are doing the same job, have the same responsibilities but have different anatomies, you are entitled to the same pay. The pay differential gap is closing but when will it close. Other factors such as ethnicity, race and age were not discussed in this paper but also have to be factored.

No comments:

Post a Comment