As more and more women take up top leadership positions, the question being raised is whether they bring a female touch to the boardroom or are simply continuing male leadership patterns. Research conducted in 2005 by the global consulting firm Caliper and Aurora, a women’s business network in the United Kingdom, suggests areas where the leadership styles of men and women differ.
They found that women demonstrate a more inclusive, team-building leadership style.  Women are more interested in first hearing all points of view and then making the best possible decision.   Women can be more persuasive than their male counterparts and better able to bring others to see their point of view. They are also willing to modify their own position, if necessary. Men, on the other hand, are more likely to push for their own perspective rather than persuading others and to convince through the strength of their position.
The research showed that women possess stronger interpersonal skills (empathy, flexibility and sociability) and are more assertive. However, they feel the sting of rejection and may dwell on it and tend to be a little self-critical. Confidence and helping them believe that they can do whatever they want to do is important.
The studies also found that women are more likely to ignore rules and take risks. They tend to have a greater need to get things done and are less likely to hesitate or focus on small details. They are also less interested in what has been than in what can be done.
Do these findings reflect your own work environment? Are there any other differences?
Source: The qualities that distinguish women leaders (Caliper 2005)
Just by chance (meaning just as the new blog was announced) I will be attending,on October 22, a day and a half session organized by the University of British Columbia’s Sauder School of business. I heard in the media about this Women’s Forum entitled Women on Board: Transforming Corporate Culture.
In the advertizing for this forum, those on the “who should attend” section mentioned the”C’s” ie Ceo’s Coo’s, chairs of etc. As there was no mention of NGOs (in fact I may be the only representative from an NGO attending). I phoned and said given my association with IFUW which has as one of its priorities Women as Leaders and Decision Makers I would like to attend. They certainly welcomed me and I am looking forward to time well spent educating each other and of course I will be promoting IFUW.
Included in the cost of the forum is a copy of a book entitled
Why Women Mean Business. Understanding the emergence of our next Next Economic Revolution, written by one of the speakers Avivah Wittenberg-Cox.
More after Thursday!
IFUW thanks for this opportunity to air our views on women leadership vs men’s leadership. To a certain extent YES but often times practice can totally different. In certain experiences women also have demonstrate a hard line approach in their leadership, and I suggest the research should also look at it from that experience. Often times we hear women oppress their fellow women and this does not demonstrate the team spirit the research has highlighted. If these positives are only vs women to men and not women to women, then there is problem. Is it the insecurity issue, is it a manipulative or submissive tendencies. Of course these are general Leadership tendencies/challenges. Women’s Agenda of Equality will be achieved if these tendencies are dealt with. We need to address them from a positive lens other than being on the defence when such issues are raised. Some women would prefer having male colleagues than women. Why is it so?????
It’s very important we can see that some women in Mexico when they have a high position oppress another women, that’a why sometimes they prefer to a man with culture feminist.
I agree with Mary that women tend to be a little different from men in that women tend to be a little difficult as far as dealing with their female colleagues. It is perhaps a product of their upbringing, because for women to excel they have to be tough. I think that it is due to a feeling of insecurity when it comes to dealing with other women, i.e hoping to get rid of the competition before they get to your level. Women want to be totally in control, which in some cases is easy with men because their power of influence and persuasion is greater, but when it comes to dealing with other women it becomes emotional, and decisions tend to come from the heart rather than the head. It is my experience that women bosses sometimes have imagined enemies in other women in form of partners, cars and money, and this impacts greatly on how they relate in the office. It is good to have more women in formal employment, but some of them are impossible to work with. I ma very comfortable working with men, but I must say it has not always been the case with women.
I had a most interesting day last Thursday at the Women on Board forum I mentioned previously. The main theme was lack of diversity on Boards or in Management and how to overcome this. (diversity being defined here as gender diversity..no other components being mentioned) 300 women attended (about 250 under 40 I guessed) some to learn and utilize the new gender bilingualism and others to get the attention of mainly male Boards and companies by publicizing the fact that increasing the women component in all positions but especially in leadership, results in immeasurable benefits for all.
(othing was mentioned about the difficulties of women dealing with women superiors.) Much was said about the value of acknowledging differences and how the results benefited both men and women. Basically many boards and businesses should be learning about how things are run in the 21st Century, discarding previous 20th century models. Gender needs a budget not only a cadre of female volunteers.Giving women permission to achieve power on their own terms using their own language is a must for employers or Boards seeking to capitalize on their investment in women. Successful strategies included actively encouraging women to return to a position after a few years of child bearing or other reasons. Some mentoring programmes keep a list of those mentored which Board or companies can tap into . It is a delicate balancing act one in which women want to have the same opportunities as men based on a level playing field. Unfortunately in many cases “Women may hold the key but men still control the lock”
(Avivah Wittenberg- Cox , a Canadian living in France was the key note speaker . She is the author of ‘Why Women Mean Business)
Sorry..I don’t mean to corner the market on submissions but before we leave this subject I wanted to point out the following: contained in the the following url is an important announcement which you may know about. The Women’s Leadership Fund was launched Yesterday (Vancouver time) by Swiss based Naissance Capital. It will urge investors to to back companies with top female managers. The founders are Kim Campbell (former Canadian Prime Minister) Jenny Ship[ley (former New Zealand Prime Minister) and Cherie Blair wife of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. As it is in a Canadian newspaper there is an emphasis on Kim Campbell but certainly the other two women are equally well known.
http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Campbell+helps+launch+global+fund/2148330/story.html
As a general director of a town in the Netherlands, I recognize the differences between the female and male style of leadership, although the differences between women and between men are greater than between men and women.
A friend of mine, Diann Rodgers Healey is publishing a book on her PhD thesis ABANDONING LEADERSHIP FOR A BETTER WAY OF BEING
FOR WOMEN AND MEN – Doing Leadership Co-existentially. Her research shows that there is an increase in the number of women with objectives to develop their leadership potential and gain leadership positions. However, statistics clearly show that globally women have not really made it in the world of leadership. According to the United Nation’s Women Watch, “…the proportion of women in national assemblies still barely scrapes 16% on average…†(2008). In the U.S. women’s
advancement in corporate leadership continues to stagnate; in Australia the percentage of women on boards is decreasing. Diann’s book explores the argument that “women will not make it in leadership because the conceptualisation of leadership from the earliest days of history has excluded women. Moreover,
the evolution of the concept of leadership over decades has excluded women. Further to that, contemporary conceptualisations and practices of leadership continue to exclude women. In fact, the whole lineage of leadership theory and practice predominantly excludes women. And worse,
women will continue to be excluded from leadership in years to come due to all of the above. A vicious spiralling circle that perpetuates and reinforces inequity against women!” Solutions such as diversity, equality initiatives and anti-discrimination laws to insist that women are included are at best, band-aid solutions, because they work at the fringes of a system that has at its core the exclusion of women and femininity and the inclusion of men and masculinity which
is what leadership is universally associated with. Women’s performance in leadership is judged against male benchmarks. “Even if they succeed, they will not shift mindsets about women’s capabilities and pave the way for other women because the whole scenario is that of a man’s world. To partake of it is to play by its rules and be judged against them.” Diann’s model of co-existence:
is a new way of being for men and women
calls for respect for all, void of any criteria and conditions
moves beyond equity and equality
individuals are encouraged to be in a context that values and supports their being who they are
is void of gender limitations and benchmarks set by men and power over others
promotes trust of individuals and acknowledges individuals’ rights
the language of inclusion promotes cohesion, collaboration, respecting parallel or divergent journeys and valuing all contributions.
promotes individualism and collectivism
encourages individuals to be who they are and to do their best for the collective, valuing each other’s contributions. I think this is a very important study.
I don’t know why men think they are so on top, because I don’t even think Adam was a male; I think Adam was the female and the word just got switched around…ya know how men are and how they switch things around?? Well, I think they switched that around somehow too. Anyway, I think Adams rib wasn’t a rib at all; I think it was something….lets just say “down there”. And this gives the reason why men have beards and women don’t, and it also gives the reason why women don’t have that “rib” anymore. They are completely messing up this world just as they did when they messed up the Garden of Eden. Yes, they DO switch things around!