Without a doubt, gender does play a vital role in both the perception of leadership skills and the perception of the characteristics of a leader based on his/her gender. There are those individuals who feel that in order for a female executive to succeed she has to embody some male characteristics necessary for success. I feel that there are more important characteristics which can determine whether an individual should be included on boards of directors. In considering board membership, one has to look beyond the gender of the individual and focus on the inherent characteristics. In so doing, one has to examine the pertinent literature on the correlation between gender and leadership skills.
Gender difference studies conducted in societal settings have proven to be both revealing and controversial, yielding contradictory results. Throughout recorded history and across most cultures, females have commonly been expected to defer to males in all aspects of life (Glick & Fiske, 2000). In general, males have occupied more socially prominent positions than their female counterparts. Moreover, men are expected to be act more aggressively and violently than women. In fact, even young boys are often required to prove their masculinity via strenuous competitive and aggressive behavior.
These socially conditioned gender differences have traditionally reinforced a patriarchy in which men define the social norms, occupy public positions, formulate laws and rules, and control women (Reeves, 2000). Regardless of the advances made by women in recent years, the bias against women in the professional world is evidenced by the fact that they continue to struggle with the underlying sexual stereotypes that are prevalent in society. One of the dominant reasons for this is the self-perception of many women as interlopers in a male world or as being forced to play a game they did not create.
Contrary to the women who succeed by adopting the masculine traits, many men see themselves as naturally dominant types who do not have to “fake” leadership, aggressive behavior, and physical courage (Ridgeway, 2001).
The significance of these findings was assessed by determining how the plight of women entrepreneurs could be improved, such as the eradication of barriers to entrepreneurship confronted by women entrepreneurs. Apart from addressing the deliberate exclusion of potential women from pursuing their dream of owning a business, this study investigated the entrepreneurial characteristics, measures of entrepreneurial success, and education level of current entrepreneurs. These findings present a realistic viewpoint from entrepreneurs who have shared their experiences, both the positive and negative, of business ownership.
In some studies, (Lipman-Blumen, 1996; Reskin & Padavic, 1994; Wellington, 1999) researchers have found that women and men exhibit the same type of behaviors and abilities in leadership roles. Specifically, these women exhibit the aggressiveness, the analytical nature, and the orientation toward tasks, instead of toward relationships—characteristics that are generally associated with women.
Contrary to the stereotypical conceptions of female behavior that are manifested in the leadership styles, Lipman-Blumen (1996) argued that these female leaders could be even more task-oriented than their male counterparts—a behavioral characteristic that is typically related to men. Furthermore, women’s predisposition towards accomplishing tasks by forging relationships also proved to be unfounded in Lipman-Blumen’s research. As with male leaders, the female leaders tended to focus on accomplishing tasks without relying on relationships (Lipman-Blumen, 1996).
The behavior of successful women in leadership positions can be explained by the fact that they have natural inborn preferences, or have opted to adopt the masculine style of leadership so that their male peers and employers would accept them. Because male employers often promote employees who share similar social characteristics and traits with them, they are more likely to promote men to the upper ranks (Reskin & Padavic, 1994). Alternatively, a style of leadership that is considered masculine could be an inborn preference.
In examining the literature, it is prudent to point out that the literature is inconclusive at best, however, one has to examine the notion of the perception of society as a whole when corporations are seen as having women on their board of directors. This sends a message that there is a level of diversity within the corporation. This can have a positive impact on the profitability of the company in that the corporation is viewed as an equal opportunity employer and individuals are likely to support that company.
In terms of leadership skills, I do not feel that the gender of an individual alone can accurately depict his/her leadership skills. I do not think that having women on a board of directors indicates better or worst governance based on the gender of the individuals based on the body of empirical research presented in this paper.
References
Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: Hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763-775.
Lipman-Blumen, J. (1996). Connective edge. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Reeves, M. (2000). Suppressed, forced out, and fired: How successful women lose their jobs. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Reskin, B., & Padavic, I. (1994). Women and men at work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
Ridgeway, C. L. (2001). Gender, status, and leadership. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 637.
Wellington, S. (1999). Advancing women in business: You’ve come a long way maybe! Vital Speeches of the Day, 65, 637-639.