Imagine a Leader — Is She A Woman?
Imagine a leader. Imagine what they look like, what their position is, what they do. What traits do they have that make them an effective leader? Lastly, did you imagine a woman?
Being recognised in the workplace as a leader is more difficult for women than for men. While most organisations have embarked on a commitment to diversity, inclusion, and equality in the workplace, a persistent problem is a clear underrepresentation of women in leadership roles — upper-level leadership positions are still dominated by men.
Insights from the Workplace Gender Equity Agency (WGEA) reveal that in 2019, Australian women made up 17.1% of chief executive officers, 14.1% of board chairs, 29.3% of board members, 30.2% of key management personnel, 30% of executive managers, and 33.1% of senior managers.
The business case for women in leadership
What if I told you that with one simple solution your organisation could easily harness higher profitability, better organisational decision-making, higher innovation and creativity, more organisational agility and flexibility, the ability to attract and retain top talent, reduced turnover, and a better understanding of a wider range of markets? It sounds too good to be true, doesn’t it?
It has been consistently found that a strong causal relationship exists between increasing the share of women in leadership positions and outperforming the competition on every measure of profitability and performance, and this relationship exists whether it be more women on boards or appointing a female CEO. An increase of 10% or more in the share of female key management personnel can lead to an increase in market value of $104.7 million for the average company, a 10% increase in the share of female board members can lead to a $78.5 million increase, and simply appointing a female CEO can lead to a $79.6 million increase in market value.
The good news is that it isn’t too good to be true. The bad news is that we still have some ways to go before women and men have equal access to opportunities and career development and can work free from bias. A plethora of invisible barriers, often referred to as the “glass ceiling”, face women as they attempt to ride to leadership positions.
Gender stereotypes
Women’s leadership styles tend to differ from men’s, however, men and women are equally as effective leaders. Women are impeded by double binds and double standards, dilemmas in which women can be penalised for displaying too many masculine traits more often associated with leadership positions, such as assertiveness, dominance, and self-confidence, but can be perceived as incompetent leaders if they display traits seen as more feminine, such as kindness, empathy, and sensitivity.
Did you picture a male leader at the start of this article? The “think-manager-think-male” theory suggests that both men and women consider leadership and management positions as more masculine and better suited to males. Social role theory builds upon this and describes the double bind experienced when there is a conflict between the social expectations of women to be gentle and nurturing and the more masculine requirements of a leadership position. Women are assessed less favourable for leadership roles because the same leadership behaviour is appraised more positively when attributed to a male than a female, and women are at their highest risk of stereotypical appraisal when they form less than 25% of a management level.
Organisational culture and structure
Organisations are typically structured to favour stereotypical masculine values, such as rewarding being domineering over people-orientation, or tough-mindedness over empathy. Many old organisations have histories rooted in tradition and conservatism, and boys’ club cultures are rampant. Partner this with bureaucratic, centralised decision-making and an unwillingness to disrupt the status quo and you have an organisation impossible for women to break into.
Recruitment and career pipeline
Different recruitment and performance evaluation standards for men and women, and a lack of access to informal networks, mentoring, and sponsorships underpin gender bias in recruitment and career pipeline. Men will nominate themselves for positions that they might be under-qualified for, but women do not often nominate themselves unless they meet all of the requirements listed. A report by McKinsey & Company found that men are often selected or promoted based on their potential for the position while women are evaluated based on their experience, meaning women need to prove to both themselves and others that they are capable enough for the position before they even get there.
Organisations often prefer hiring leaders from similar backgrounds and industries. It is common for organisations to believe that specific capabilities and experiences are considered necessary for promotion into leadership positions, or that certain positions cannot be performed part-time, limiting the flexibility of work and reducing the likelihood that women will apply.
So, how do we navigate these barriers?
Why do gender equity strategies often fail?
A common reason why many organisations’ gender equity strategies fail is that their targets and objectives are essentially set in a social vacuum, encouraging women to enter leadership positions without directly addressing the invisible barriers of why women are not advancing to leadership positions in the first place, such as gender bias and culture. An effective strategy will address these underlying factors and not only support female leaders but influence others’ recognition of women as leaders.
Gender bias education
Without a deep understanding of the biases that disadvantage women, such as gendered career paths, lack of access to sponsors, and double binds, people turn to stereotypes to explain why women are not in leadership positions. Have you ever heard someone say “women aren’t interested”, “they’re not good negotiators”, “they’re too busy taking care of their families”, or “women opt-out”? Using stereotypes tells people that women who have succeeded are anomalies and tells the women who have experienced setbacks that they are failures. The focus should be shifted away from how women are perceived as leaders and to what women need to learn to achieve their goals. Gender bias education empowers women to take action in countering those effects personally and encourages men to do the same.
Review recruitment practices
It is important that organisations seriously consider what capabilities and skills are necessary for the role, and not create an unrealistic wish-list of ideals. As men are more likely to apply for positions that they are under-qualified for, rewriting job descriptions to emphasise necessary cognitive skills as opposed to specific types of experience could encourage more women to apply for positions that they might otherwise consider themselves not good enough for and open up a wider talent pool from which to draw from. For example, looking for a candidate with experience as a CEO to fill a board position automatically eliminates a huge percentage of women in the workforce.
Flexible work for everyone
It is a persistent and harmful belief that flexible work arrangements are mainly for women or that women’s career priorities change once they have children. Research and WGEA reports indicate that men are less likely to utilise flexible work arrangements and are twice as likely as women to have their flexible work requests rejected. This lack of support and encouragement for men to take on caring responsibilities and utilise flexible work arrangements is damaging to gender equality as it perpetuates the view that women are primary carers. This strengthens the need to actively encourage both men and women to utilise flexible work arrangements.
Elevate mentors to sponsors
Women have less access to senior-level sponsors, significantly limiting advancement into leadership. While many organisations utilise mentors to share knowledge and support their people, research indicates that mentoring programs increase the likelihood of male promotion but have no effect on the promotion of women. Sponsorship goes beyond the private, coaching relationship of a mentor and becomes a more public relationship in which the sponsor shares strategic information about how to advance, connects the individual with influential people, provides high-visibility opportunities, and publicly advocates for the individual in their career advancement.
Blatant discrimination is no longer evident in most organisations, however, subtle biases and discrimination still exists and often go undetected. More women are holding senior leadership positions across Australian companies than ever before, however, women still remain grossly underrepresented. It is difficult for organisations to talk of innovation, getting ahead of the game, and agile advancement when half of the population is still being left behind. Next time someone asks you to imagine an effective leader, picture a woman.
