essay on female leadership

• Current Issue
• Past Issues
• Get New Issue Alerts
• American Academy of Arts 
and Sciences

Women, Power & Leadership

Many more women provide visible leadership today than ever before. Opening up higher education for women and winning the battle for suffrage brought new opportunities, along with widespread availability of labor-saving devices and the discovery and legalization of reliable, safe methods of birth control. Despite these developments, women ambitious for leadership still face formidable obstacles: primary if not sole responsibility for childcare and homemaking; the lack of family-friendly policies in most workplaces; gender stereotypes perpetuated in popular culture; and in some parts of the world, laws and practices that deny women education or opportunities outside the home. Some observers believe that only a few women want to hold significant, demanding leadership posts; but there is ample evidence on the other side of this debate, some of it documented in this volume. Historic tensions between feminism and power remain to be resolved by creative theorizing and shrewd, strategic activism. We cannot know whether women are “naturally” interested in top leadership posts until they can attain such positions without making personal and family sacrifices radically disproportionate to those faced by men.

Nannerl O. Keohane , a Fellow of the American Academy since 1991, is a political philosopher and university administrator who served as President of Wellesley College and Duke University. She is currently affiliated with the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University and is a Visiting Scholar at the McCoy Family Center for Ethics in Society at Stanford University. Her books include Philosophy and the State in France: The Renaissance to the Enlightenment (1980), Higher Ground: Ethics and Leadership in the Modern University (2006), and Thinking about Leadership (2010). She is a member of the Board of Directors of the American Academy.

One of the most dramatic changes in recent decades has been the increasing prominence of women in positions of leadership. Many more women are providing leadership in government, business, higher education, nonprofit ventures, and other areas of life, in many more countries of the world, than would ever have been true in the past. This essay addresses four aspects of this development.

I will note the kinds of leadership women have routinely provided, and list factors that help explain why this pattern has changed dramatically in the past half century. I will mention some of the obstacles that still block the path for women in leadership. Then I will ask how ambitious women generally are for leadership, and discuss the fraught relationship between feminism and power, before concluding with a brief look at the future that might lie ahead.

As we approach this subject, we need to understand what we mean by “leadership.” I use the following definition: “Leaders define or clarify goals for a group of individuals and bring together the energies of members of that group to pursue those goals.” 1  This conception is deliberately broad, designed to capture various types of leadership, in various groups, not just the work of leaders who hold the most visible offices in a large society.

A leader can define or clarify goals by issuing a memo or an executive order, an edict or a fatwa or a tweet, by passing a law, barking a command, or presenting an interesting idea in a meeting of colleagues. Leaders can mobilize people’s energies in ways that range from subtle, quiet persuasion to the coercive threat or the use of deadly force. Sometimes a charismatic leader such as Martin Luther King Jr. can define goals and mobilize energies through rhetoric and the power of example.

It is also helpful to distinguish leadership from two closely related concepts: power and authority.

All leaders have some measure of power, in the sense of influencing or determining priorities for other individuals. But leadership cannot be a synonym for holding power. Power is often defined in the straightforward way suggested by political scientist Robert Dahl: “ A has power over B to the extent that he can get B to do something that B would not otherwise do.” 2 A bully or an assailant with a gun wields power in this sense, but it would not be appropriate to call such a person a “leader.”

Leadership often involves exercising authority with the formal legitimacy of a position in a governmental structure or high office in a large organization. Holding authority in these ways provides clear opportunities for leadership. Yet many men and women we would want to call leaders are not in positions of authority, and not everyone in a formal office provides leadership. As John Gardner, author of several valuable books on leadership, noted, “We have all occasionally encountered top persons who couldn’t lead a squad of seven-year-olds to the ice cream counter.” 3

We can think of leadership as a spectrum, in terms of both visibility and the power the leader wields. On one end of the spectrum, we have the most visible: authoritative leaders like the president of the United States or the prime minister of the United Kingdom, or a dictator such as Hitler or Qaddafi. At the opposite end of the spectrum is casual, low-key leadership found in countless situations every day around the world, leadership that can make a significant difference to the individuals whose lives are touched by it.

Over the centuries, the first kind–the out-in-front, authoritative leadership–has generally been exhibited by men. Some men in positions of great authority, including Nelson Mandela, have chosen a strategy of “leading from behind”; more often, however, top leaders have been quite visible in their exercise of power. Women (as well as some men) have provided casual, low-key leadership behind the scenes. But this pattern has been changing, as more women have taken up opportunities for visible, authoritative leadership.

Across all the centuries of which we have any record, women have been largely absent from positions of formal authority. Such posts, with a few exceptions, were routinely held by men. Women have therefore lacked opportunities to exercise leadership in the most visible public settings. And as both cause and consequence of this fact, leadership has been closely associated with masculinity. In some parts of the world this assumption is still dominant: even in what we think of as the most advanced countries, there are people who think that men are “natural leaders,” and women are meant to follow them.

Yet despite this stubborn linkage between leadership and maleness, some women in almost every society have proved themselves capable of providing strong, visible leadership. Women exercised formal public authority when dynasty or marriage-lines trumped gender, so that Elizabeth I of England or Catherine the Great of Russia could rule as monarch. There are cultures in which wise women are regularly consulted, either as individuals or as members of the council of the tribe. All-female institutions are especially auspicious for women as leaders, including convents, girls’ schools, and women’s colleges, where women have often held authoritative posts.

Women have led in situations where men are temporarily absent: in wartime when the men are away fighting, or in a community like Nantucket in the eighteenth or nineteenth century, where most of the men were whaling in distant seas for years at a time. Women have provided visible leadership in movements for social betterment, including the prohibition and settlement house campaigns of the late nineteenth century and the battle for women’s suffrage. “First ladies” have leveraged their access to power to promote important causes. The impressive accomplishments of Jane Addams and Eleanor Roosevelt stand as prime examples of female leadership. Women have been leaders in family businesses in many different settings. And countless women across history have provided leadership in education, religious activities, care for the sick and wounded, cultural affairs, and charity for the poor.

So that’s a rough, impressionistic survey of the leadership women have exercised in the past: a very few “out front,” as queens or abbesses or heads of school, with many providing more informal leadership in smaller communities or behind the scenes.

This picture has changed dramatically in the past half-century. Many more women today hold authoritative posts, as prime ministers, heads of universities, CEOs of corporations, presidents of nonprofit organizations, and bishops in Protestant denominations. Why has this happened in the past few decades, rather than sooner, or later, or never?

As we ponder this question, we must also note that the changes have proceeded unevenly. It is still unusual for a woman to be CEO of a major public corporation or the president of a country with direct elections for the head of government, as distinct from parliamentary systems. Women’s leadership in religious organizations depends on the doctrines of the religion or sect and the influences of the surrounding society on how these doctrines are interpreted. We will look at some of the barriers blocking change in these and other areas.

And finally, are women as ambitious for leadership as men, or are there systematic differences between the two sexes in the appetite for gaining and using power? Can tensions between the core concepts of feminism and the wielding of power help us understand these issues?

In the past half-century, fifty-six women have served as president or prime minister of their countries. 4 In the United States, women hold office as senators and congresswomen, governors and mayors, cabinet officers and university presidents, heads of foundations and social service agencies, rabbis, generals, and principal investigators. Women have been the CEOs of GM, IBM, Yahoo, and Pepsi-Cola. There are women judges sitting at all levels of the court system, and women leaders in several prominent international organizations.

In the United States, the unprecedented numbers of women candidates in the 2018 midterm elections and the 2019 Democratic presidential primaries are striking examples of women tackling the long-standing identification of leadership with masculinity. One hundred and seventeen women won office in 2018, including ninety-six members of the House of Representatives, twelve senators, and nine governors. Each of these was a record number, compared with any year in the past. 5 Among Democrats, female candidates were more likely to win than their male counterparts. 6 Hillary Clinton’s candidacy for the presidency was a significant step in splintering, if not yet shattering, one of the hardest “glass ceilings” in the world. And Angela Merkel’s deft leadership for Germany and the European Union has provided a model for women in politics worldwide.

We can multiply instances from many different fields, from many different contexts: women today are much more likely to provide visible leadership in major institutions than they have been at any time in history.

Yet why have these changes occurred precisely at this time? I’ll suggest half a dozen factors that have made it possible for women to take these significant strides in leadership.

First is the establishment of institutions of higher education for women to-ward the end of the nineteenth century. Both men and women worked to open male institutions to women and to build schools and colleges specifically for women students. Careers and activities that had been beyond the reach of all women now for the first time became a plausible ambition. Higher education provided a new platform for leadership by women in many fields.

Virginia Woolf’s powerful essay A Room of One’s Own (1929) makes clear how crucial it was for women to be educated in a university setting. College degrees allowed women to enter professions previously barred to them and, as a result, become financially independent of their fathers and husbands and gain a measure of control over their own lives. Woolf’s less well-known but equally powerful treatise from 1939, Three Guineas, considers the impact of this development on social institutions and practices, including the relations between women and men.

The second crucial development, beginning in the late nineteenth century, was the invention of labor-saving devices such as washing machines and dryers, dishwashers and vacuum cleaners, followed in the second half of the twentieth century by computers and, later still, electronic assistants capable of ordering goods online to be delivered to your door. The women (or men) in charge of running a household today have far more mechanical and electronic support than ever before.

Ironically, for middle-class Americans today, much of the time freed up by these labor-saving devices has been redirected into “super-parenting”: parents are expected to spend much more time educating, protecting, and developing the skills of their children. Yet one might hope that these patterns could be more malleable than the punishing work required of our great-grandmothers to maintain a household.

Third is the success of the long struggle for women’s suffrage in many countries early in the twentieth century. Even more than the efforts that opened colleges and universities for women, the suffrage movements were deliberate, well-organized campaigns in which women leaders used their sources of influence strategically to obtain their goals. Enfranchised women could vote for candidates who advocated policies with particular resonance for them, including family- and child-oriented regulations and laws that tackled discriminatory practices in the labor market. Many female citizens voted as their fathers and husbands did; but the possibility of using the ballot box to pursue their priority interests was for the first time available to them. Women could also stand for election and be appointed to government offices. It is important to note, however, that in the United States, the success of the movement was tarnished by the denial of the vote to many Black persons in the South until the Voting Rights Act of 1965. 7

Fourth factor: the easy availability of reliable methods of birth control. Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own gives a vivid portrayal of women in earlier centuries who were hungry for knowledge or professional activity but bore and tended multiple children, making it impossible to find either the time or the opportunity to be educated. In the early twentieth century, there was for the first time widespread public discussion of the methods and moral dimensions of birth control. The opportunity to engage in family planning by controlling the number and timing of births gave women more freedom to engage in other tasks without worrying about unwanted pregnancies. By 1960, when “the pill” became the birth control device of choice for millions of women, the battle for legal contraception had largely been won in most of the world.

Next is women’s liberation, the “second wave” of feminism from the late 1960s through the early 1980s. This multifaceted movement encouraged countless women to reenvision their options and led to important changes in attitudes, behavior, and legal systems. The ideas of the movement were originally developed by women in Western Europe and the United States, but the implications were felt worldwide, and women in many other countries provided examples of feminist ideas and activities.

Among the most important by-products of the feminist movement in the United States was Title IX, passed as part of the Education Amendments Act in 1972. New opportunities for women in athletics and in combatting job discrimination followed the passage of this bill. There is ample evidence that participating in sports strengthens a girl’s self-confidence as well as her physical capacity. 8 And although the Equal Rights Amendment has not passed, the broadened application of the Fourteenth Amendment by federal courts made a significant difference in opening up equal opportunities for women.

A fifth factor contributing to greater scope for women’s activities is the change in economic patterns–contemporary capitalism–in which many families feel that they need two incomes to maintain themselves or achieve the lifestyle they covet. This puts more women in the workforce and thus on a potential ladder to leadership, despite remaining biases against women in jobs as varied as construction, teaching economics in a university, representing clients in major trials, and fighting forest fires.

Finally, the change in social expectations that is the cumulative result of all these developments, so that for the first time in history, in many parts of the world, it seems “natural” that a woman might be ambitious for a major leadership post and that with the right combination of talent, experience, and luck, she might actually get it. The more often it happens, the more likely it is that others will be inspired to follow that example, whereas in the past, it would never have occurred to a young girl that she might someday be CEO of a company, head of a major NGO, member of Congress, dean of a cathedral, or president of a university.

If you simply project forward the trajectory we have seen since the 1960s, you might assume that the future will be one in which all top leadership posts finally become gender-neutral, as often held by women as by men. The last bastions will fall, and it will be just as likely that the CEO of a company or the president of the country will be a woman as a man; the same will be true of other forms of leadership.

Sometimes we act as though this is the obvious path ahead, and the only question is how long it will take. On this point, the evidence is discouraging. The Gender Parity Project of the World Economic Forum predicted in 2015 that “if you were born today, you would be 118 years old when the economic gender gap is predicted to close in 2133.” 9  The report also notes that although gender parity around the world has dramatically improved in the areas of health and education, “only about 60% of the economic participation gap and only 21% of the political empowerment gap have been closed.”

Yet however glacial the rate of change, we may think: “we’ll get there eventually, because that’s where things are moving.” You might call this path convergence toward parity between men and women as leaders. This is the scenario that appears to underlie much of our current thinking, even if we have not articulated it as such.

This scenario, however, ignores some formidable barriers that women ambitious for formal leadership still face. Several familiar images or metaphors have been coined to make this point: “glass ceiling” or “leaky pipeline.” In Through the Labyrinth , sociologists Alice Eagly and Linda Carli use the ancient female image of the “labyrinth” to describe the multiple obstacles women face on the path to top leadership. It’s surely not a straight path toward eventual convergence. 10

The first and most fundamental obstacle to achieving top leadership in any field is that women in almost all societies still have primary (if not sole) responsibility for childcare and homemaking. Few organizations (or nation-states) have workplace policies that support family-friendly lifestyles, including high-quality, reliable, affordable childcare; flexible work schedules while children are young; and support for anyone caring for a sick child or aging parent. This makes things very hard for working parents, and especially for working mothers.

The unyielding expectation that one must show one’s seriousness about a job by being available to work nine- or ten-hour days, being on-call at any time of the week, and ready to move the family to wherever one’s services are needed is a tremendous obstacle to the advancement of women. Although hours worked are correlated with productivity in some jobs and professions, the situation is far more complicated than such a simple metric would indicate. Nonetheless, this measure is often used for promotion and job opportunities, explicitly or in a more subtle fashion. This expectation cuts heavily against a working mother, or a father who might want to spend significant time with his young children.

One of the most stubborn obstacles in the labyrinth is the lack of “on-ramps”: that is, pathways for women (or men) who have “stopped out” to manage a household and raise their children to rejoin their professions at a level commensurate with their talent and past experience. 11 Choices made when one’s children are born are likely to define the available options for a mother for the rest of her life, in terms of professional opportunities and salary level. We need more flexible pathways through the labyrinth so that women (or men) can–if they wish–spend more time with their kids in their earliest years and still get back on the fast track and catch up.

We need to work toward a world in which marriage with children more often involves parenting and homemaking by both partners, so that all the burden does not fall on the mother. We urgently need more easily available high-quality childcare outside the home so that working parents can be assured that their kids are well cared for while they both work full time. Reaching this goal will require more deliberate action on the part of governments, businesses, and policy-makers to create family-friendly workplaces. Such policies are in place in several European countries but have not so far been implemented in the United States. 12

Other labyrinthine obstacles include gender stereotypes that keep getting in the way of women being judged simply on their own accomplishment. Women are supposed to be nurturing, but if you are kind and sensitive, somebody will say you are not tough enough to make hard decisions; if you show that you are up to such challenges, you may be described as “shrill” or “bitchy.” This “catch-22” clearly plagued Hillary Rodham Clinton in her first campaign for the presidency and took an even more virulent form in her second campaign, when her opponent in the general election and his supporters regularly shouted profoundly misogynistic comments at her.

Women also have fewer opportunities to be mentored. Many (not all) senior women are happy to mentor other women; but if there aren’t any senior women around, and the men aren’t sympathetic, you don’t get this support. Some senior male professors or corporate leaders do try specifically to advance the careers of young women, but many male bosses find it easier to mentor young men, seeing them as younger versions of themselves; they take them out for a beer or a round of golf, and find it hard to imagine doing this for young women.

The #MeToo movement has brought valuable support to many women unwilling to speak out about sexual assault and harassment in the workplace. This is surely a significant step in removing obstacles to women’s advancement. However, this very visible effort has also made some male bosses nervous about reaching out to female subordinates in ways that might be misinterpreted. Men who are already deeply committed to advancing the cause of women do not usually react this way, but those who are less committed may use the #MeToo movement as an excuse not to support women employees, or more often, be genuinely uncertain about which boundaries are inappropriate to cross.

Another insidious obstacle for women on the path to top leadership is popular culture, a formidable force in shaping expectations for young people. Contemporary media rarely suggest a high-powered career as an appropriate ambition for a person of the female sex. The ambitions of girls and women are discouraged when they are taught to be deferential to males and not to compete with them for resources, including power and recognition. Women internalize these expectations, which leads us to question our own abilities. Women are much less likely to put themselves forward for a promotion, a fellowship, or a demanding assignment than men even when they are objectively more qualified in terms of their credentials. 13

And finally, in terms of obstacles to women’s out-front leadership, I have so far been describing the situation in Western democracies. As we know, women who might want to be involved in political activity or provide leadership in any institution face even more formidable obstacles in many parts of the world today. Think of Afghanistan, where the Taliban have denied women education or any opportunities outside the home. For young women in such settings, achieving professional status and leadership is a very distant dream.

For all of these reasons, therefore–expectations of primary responsibility for domestic duties, absence of “on-ramps” for returning to the workforce, gender stereotypes, absence of mentors, the power of popular culture, if not systematic exclusion from political activity–women ambitious for out-front leadership must deal with significant barriers that do not confront their male peers.

Addressing the topic of women’s leadership in terms of the obstacles we face makes sense, however, only if significant numbers of women are ambitious for top leadership. In an essay entitled “You’ve Come a Long Way, Baby–and You’ve Got Miles to Go,” leadership scholar Barbara Kellerman asks us to consider the possibility that most women really do not want such jobs. As she put it, “Work at the top of the greasy pole takes time, saps energy, and is usually all-consuming.” So “maybe the trade-offs high positions entail are ones that many women do not want to make.” Maybe, in other words, there are fewer women senators or CEOs because women “do not want what men have.” 14

If Kellerman is right, as women see what such positions entail, fewer will decide that high-profile leadership is where our ambitions lie, and the numbers of women in such posts will recede from the high-water mark of the late twentieth century toward something more like the world before 1950. Women have proved that we can do it, in terms of high-powered, visible leadership posts. We have seen the promised land, and many women will decide they are happier where most women traditionally have been.

We found something of this kind in a Princeton study on the fortieth anniversary of the university’s decision to include women as undergraduates. President Shirley Tilghman charged a Steering Committee on Undergraduate Women’s Leadership, which issued its report in March 2011, with determining “whether women undergraduates are realizing their academic potential and seeking opportunities for leadership at the same rate and in the same manner as their male colleagues.” 15 In a nutshell, the answer was no: women were not seeking leadership opportunities at the same rate or in the same manner.

Many recent Princeton alumnae and current female students the committee surveyed or interviewed in 2010 were not interested in holding very visible leadership positions like student government president or editor of the Princetonian ; they were more comfortable leading behind the scenes, as vice president or treasurer. There had not been a female president of the student government or of the first-year class at Princeton in the first decade of the twenty-first century. Other young women told us that they were not interested in the traditional student government organizations and instead wanted to lead in an organization that would focus on something they cared about, working for a cause: the environment, education reform, tutoring at Princeton, or a dance club or an a cappella group.

When we asked young women about this, they told us that they preferred to put their efforts where they could have an impact, in places where they could actually get the work of the organization done, rather than advancing their own resumés or having a big title. In this, they gave different answers than many of their male peers. Their attitudes also differed markedly from those of the alumnae who first made Princeton coeducational forty years before. Those women in the 1970s or 1980s were feisty pioneers determined to prove that they belonged at Princeton against considerable skepticism and opposition. They showed very different aspirations than the female students of the first decade of the twentieth century and occupied all the major leadership posts on campus on a regular basis.

Thus, our committee discovered (to quote our first general finding): “There are differences–subtle but real–between the ways most Princeton female undergraduates and most male undergraduates approach their college years, and in the ways they navigate Princeton when they arrive.” We found statistically significant differences between the ambitions and comfort-levels of undergraduate men and women at Princeton in 2010, in terms of the types of leadership that appealed to them and the ways they thought about power.

If you project forward our Princeton findings, and if Barbara Kellerman and others who share her assumptions are correct, there is no reason to believe that women and men will converge in terms of types of leadership. You might instead predict that these differential ambitions will mean that women will always choose and occupy less prominent leadership posts than men, even as they make a significant difference behind the scenes.

However, this conclusion is at odds with the way things are changing today, at Princeton and elsewhere. In addition to hearing from women who preferred low-key posts, our committee learned that women who did consider running for an office like president of college government often got the message from their peers (mostly their male peers) that such posts are more appropriately sought by men. As the discussion of women’s leadership intensifies on campus, more women stand for offices they might not have considered relevant before. Quite a few women have held top positions on campus in the past decade.

The Princeton women tell us that mentoring is very important and being encouraged to compete for a post makes a big difference. When someone–an older student, a friend or colleague, a faculty or staff member–says to a young woman: “You really ought to run for this office, you’d be really good at this,” she is much more likely to decide to be a candidate. There is a good deal of evidence that this is true far beyond the Princeton campus, including the experiences of women who decide to run for political office or state their interest in a top corporate post. 16

Therefore, to those who assert that there is a “natural” difference in motivation that explains the disparities between men and women in leadership, I would respond that we cannot know whether this is true until more women are encouraged to take on positions of leadership. We cannot determine, also, whether women are “naturally” interested in top leadership posts until women everywhere can attain such positions without making personal and family sacrifices radically disproportionate to those faced by men.

In asking what drove the dramatic change in women’s opportunities for leadership over the past half-century, I mentioned as one factor the strength of second-wave feminism. From the point of view of women and leadership, it is ironic that this movement was firmly and explicitly opposed to having any individual speak for and make decisions for other members. The cherished practice was “consciousness-raising,” with a focus on group-enabled insights. The search for consensus and common views was a significant feature of any activity projected by feminist groups in this period.

Second-wave feminism led to some significant advances for women, but the rejection of any out-front leadership meant that the gains were more limited than some members of the movement had envisioned. As was the case with Occupy Wall Street in the twenty-first century, the rejection of visible public leadership constrained the development and implementation of policy, despite the passion and commitment displayed by thousands of participants. The antipathy of second-wave feminists to power, authority, and leadership also means that it is hard to envision a feminist conception of leadership without coming to terms with this legacy.

This tension between “feminism” and “power” long predates the second wave. As women from Mary Wollstonecraft onward have attempted to understand disparities between the situation of women and men, the power held by men–in the state, the economy, and the household–has been a central part of the explanation. Feminists have often identified power with patriarchy, and therefore seen power as antipathetic to their interests as women striving to flourish as independent, creative human beings, rather than as a possible tool for change.

As a result of this age-old linkage of power with patriarchy, one further step in the decades-long progression of women from subordinate positions to positions of authority and leadership is a reconstruction of what it means to provide leadership and hold power. These activities must be detached from their fundamental connection to patriarchy, to make them more compatible with womanhood. There is evidence that this is happening today, as more and more women see power as relevant for accomplishing their goals and are increasingly willing to be seen wielding it with determination and even relish.

Many women today, in multiple contexts and in different parts of the world, are becoming more comfortable with exercising authority and holding power, and are openly ambitious to do so. These leaders see no need to deny or worry about their femininity, but instead concentrate on gaining power and getting things done. For these women, to a large extent, their sex/gender is not a relevant variable.

However, the other side of the equation–men and other women becoming comfortable with women in power and seeing their sex/gender as irrelevant–is lagging behind. Women are ready to take on significant public leadership positions in ways that have never been true before. But what about their potential followers? Large numbers of citizens in many countries and employees in many organizations–men and women–may still be reluctant to accept women as leaders who hold significant power over their lives.

This fluid situation calls both for creative feminist theorizing and for consolidating steps that are already being taken in practice. One of the most effective ways to provide the groundwork for this next stage of development is for more and more women to step forward for leadership posts. As with other profound social changes, including a broader acceptance of homosexuality and support for gay marriage, observing numerous instances of the phenomenon that initially appears “unnatural” can lead, over a remarkably short period of time, to changes in values and beliefs.

People who discover that valued friends, coworkers, or family members are gay are often likely to change their views on homosexuality. The same, one might hypothesize, will be true with women in power, as powerful women become a “normal” part of governments and corporations. The more women we see in positions of power and authority, the more “natural” it will seem for women to hold such posts.

In the final section of the Princeton report, we spoke of a world in which both women and men take on all kinds of leadership posts, out front and behind the scenes, high profile and supportive. This is neither convergence toward parity nor differential ambitions: it is a change in patterns of leadership and in the understanding of what posts are worth striving for, for both women and men.

Some of the Princeton students who argued for the importance of working for a cause saw themselves as carving out a new model of leadership. They rejected the unspoken assumption behind our study that the (only) form of leadership that really counts is being head of student government or president of your class. In doing this, they were reflecting some of the values of second-wave feminism, even when they were not aware of this influence. Believing that a visible leadership post, with a big title and a corner office, is the only type of leadership worth aspiring to is the kind of conception that second-wave feminism was determined to undermine.

Nonetheless, it remains true–and important–that the out-front, high-profile offices in the major organizations and institutions of a society come with exceptional opportunities to influence the course of events and the directions taken by large communities. Even as we value work done behind the scenes and in support of a worthy cause, we should not forget that the leaders who have the most power and the greatest degree of authority in any society are the ones who can make the most substantial difference in the world. Such posts should no longer be disproportionately held by men.

In the conclusion of her feminist classic The Second Sex , published in 1949, Simone de Beauvoir reminds us that it is very hard to anticipate clearly things we have not yet seen, and that in trying to do this, we often impoverish the world ahead. As she puts it, “Let us not forget that our lack of imagination always depopulates the future.” 17 In her chapter on “The Independent Woman,” she writes:

The free woman is just being born. . . . Her “worlds of ideas” are not necessarily different from men’s, because she will free herself by assimilating them; to know how singular she will remain and how important these singularities will be, one would have to make some foolhardy predictions. What is beyond doubt is that until now women’s possibilities have been stifled and lost to humanity, and in her and everyone’s interest it is high time she be left to take her own chances. 18

Because several generations of women and men have worked hard since 1949 to make the path easier for women, our possibilities as leaders are no longer “lost to humanity.” But these gifts are still stifled to some extent, and we are still operating with models of leadership designed primarily by and for men. It is surely high time we as women–with support from our partners, our families, our colleagues, from the political system, and from society as a whole–take our own chances.

AUTHOR'S NOTE

For helpful comments, I am much indebted to Robert O. Keohane, Shirley Tilghman, Nancy Weiss Malkiel, and Dara Strolovich; to the participants in our authors’ conference in April 2019; and to students and colleagues who raised thoughtful questions after the Albright Lecture at Wellesley College in January 2014 and the Astor Lecture at the Blavatnik School of Government, Oxford University, in March 2016.

• 1 Nannerl O. Keohane, Thinking about Leadership (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2010), 23.
• 2 Robert Dahl, “The Concept of Power,” Behavioral Science 2 (3) (1957): 202.
• 3 John W. Gardner, On Leadership (New York: Free Press, 1990), 2.
• 4 A. W. Geiger and Lauren Kent, “ Number of Women Leaders around the World Has Grown, but They’re Still a Small Group ,” Fact Tank, Pew Research Center, March 8, 2017.
• 5 Maya Salam, “ A Record 117 Women Won Office, Reshaping America’s Leadership ,” The New York Times , November 7, 2018.
• 6 Center for American Women and Politics, “By the Numbers: Women Congressional Candidates in 2018,” September 12, 2018.
• 7 On this topic, see Nannerl O. Keohane and Frances McCall Rosenbluth, “Introduction,” Dædalus 149 (1) (Winter 2020).
• 8 Anne Bowker, “The Relationship between Sports Participation and Self-Esteem During Early Adolescence,” Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 38 (3) (2006): 214–229.
• 9 World Economic Forum, “ Gender Parity .”
• 10 Alice H. Eagly and Linda L. Carli. Through the Labyrinth: The Truth about How Women Become Leaders (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 2007).
• 11 Sylvia Ann Hewlett, “Off-Ramps and On-Ramps: Women’s Non-Linear Career Paths,” in Women and Leadership: The State of Play and Strategies for Change , ed. Barbara Kellerman and Deborah L. Rhode (San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 2007), 407–430.
• 12 Francine D. Blau and Lawrence M. Kahn, “Female Labor Supply: Why Is the United States Falling Behind?” The American Economic Review 103 (3) (2013): 251–256.
• 13 Institute of Leadership and Management, “ Ambition and Gender at Work ” (London: Institute of Leadership and Management, 2010).
• 14 Barbara Kellerman, “You’ve Come a Long Way, Baby–and You’ve Got Miles to Go,” in The Difference “Difference” Makes , ed. Deborah Rhode (Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2002), 55.
• 15 Steering Committee on Undergraduate Women’s Leadership, Report of the Steering Committee on Undergraduate Women’s Leadership (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University, 2011).
• 16 Richard Fox and Jennifer Lawless, “Uncovering the Origins of the Gender Gap in Political Ambitions,” American Political Science Review 108 (3) (2014): 499–519; and Jennifer Lawless and Richard Fox, It Takes a Candidate: Why Women Don’t Run for Office (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005).
• 17 Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, trans. and ed. Constance Borde and Sheila Malovany-Chevallier (New York: Random House, 2011), 765.
• 18 Ibid., 751.

Women leaders make work better. Here’s the science behind how to promote them

Psychological research shows women leaders improve businesses. Experts share how to increase the number of women in leadership roles

• Women and Girls
• Healthy Workplaces

When more women are empowered to lead, everyone benefits. Decades of studies show women leaders help increase productivity, enhance collaboration, inspire organizational dedication, and improve fairness.

Despite these benefits, only 10% of Fortune 500 companies are led by women. How can businesses create more opportunities for women in leadership spaces using psychological science?

Industrial/organizational (I/O) psychologists offer a host of evidence-backed strategies for helping close the gender gap. These include earlier identification of leadership potential, training for men and others already in power to serve as allies, and formal mentoring and sponsorship programs.

“Women still face challenges to their authority and success that are greater than those faced by their male counterparts,” said Alice Eagly, PhD, a professor of psychology emerita at Northwestern University and pioneer in researching women’s leadership. “However, despite these difficulties, women are slowly rising in political leadership and in corporate and educational leadership.”

What happens when women lead

Decades of psychological research confirm when women are empowered to take on leadership positions, the effects can be metamorphic for everyone.

• Female leaders demonstrate more transformational leadership styles , according to a landmark 1992 meta-analysis of 61 studies led by Eagly. They are more likely to epitomize what’s good in the organization and inspire people to go along with its mission, compared with men, study results show.
• Women are now seen as equally or more competent as men , finds a 2020 meta-analysis led by Eagly. The study included data from 16 nationally representative public opinion polls involving more than 30,000 U.S. adults from 1946 to 2018. The researchers looked at three types of traits—communion (i.e., compassion, sensitivity), agency (i.e., ambition, aggression), and competence (i.e., intelligence, creativity)—and whether participants thought each trait was truer of women or men or equally true of both. Results showed that competence stereotypes changed dramatically over time. For example, in one 1946 poll, only 35% of those surveyed thought men and women were equally intelligent, and of those who believed there was a difference, more thought men were the more competent sex. In contrast, in one 2018 poll, 86% believed men and women were equally intelligent, 9% believed women were more intelligent, and only 5% believed men were more intelligent. Further, communal stereotypes viewing women as more compassionate and sensitive than men strengthened over time.
• Team collaboration is greatly improved by the presence of women in the group, an effect that is primarily explained by women’s benefits to group processes, according to a 2010 study. In two studies with 699 people, organizational psychologist Anita Williams Woolley, PhD, and her colleagues examined working groups of two to five people and found the proportion of women in a group was strongly related to the group’s collective intelligence, which is their ability to work together and solve a wide range of problems. Groups with more women exhibited greater equality in conversational turn-taking, further enabling the group members to be responsive to one another and to make the best use of the knowledge and skills of members.
• Women rank better than or equal to men in seven of eight traits relevant to leadership assessed in a 2008 national survey by the Pew Research Center. Half of the respondents ranked women as more honest than men, with 20% saying that men are more honest than women. In terms of intelligence, 38% said they viewed women as smarter, with only 14% indicating men are smarter. Women were also ranked as being more compassionate, outgoing, and creative.
• The mere presence of a female leader relative to a male leader led perceivers to anticipate fairer treatment in that organization and greater projected salary and status, according to a 2022 study led by social psychologist Mansi P. Joshi, PhD. Female leaders cued organizational trust in both male- and female-dominated industries and when they occupied different levels of the organizational hierarchy.
• Appointing women to the top tiers of management can even help mitigate deep-rooted stereotypes that are expressed in language , suggests a 2022 study. Researchers used natural language processing techniques to analyze more than 43,000 shareholder documents and investor calls from 33 male- and female-led S&P 500 organizations and found that hiring female chief executive officers and board members was associated with changes in organizations’ use of language by helping to associate women with characteristics that are critical for leadership success. “Our findings suggest that female representation is not merely an end, but also a means to systematically change insidious gender stereotypes and overcome the trade-off between women being perceived as either competent or likeable,” study authors wrote.

Slow but steady progress

Thanks to ongoing efforts to promote gender equality in the workplace, female leaders are slowly making inroads in business, Congress , higher education , and in the field of psychology. Despite these bright spots, the proportion of male and female leaders is still far from equal. It’s a refrain that’s been sounded for years by psychology leaders, including the late Jean Lau Chin, EdD, the first Asian American psychologist to be licensed in the state of Massachusetts, and a pioneer in advocating for more diversity in leadership.

“Getting a seat at the table is not enough,” Chin proclaimed in a 2016 TEDx Talk . “It’s time for women and diverse leaders to be at the head of the table in leadership roles if we’re going to have a future moving forward together.”

Many women experience bias not only as a result of gender but also due to race, sexual orientation, a disability, or other aspects of their identity. Latinas and Black women are less likely than women of other races and ethnicities to report their manager supports their career development, according to a 2022 Women in the Workplace report by McKinsey & Company.

They also experience less psychological safety. McKinsey’s report found that Asian women and Black women are less likely to have strong allies on their teams. They are also less likely than White women to say senior colleagues have taken important sponsorship actions on their behalf, such as praising their skills or advocating for a compensation increase for them. In addition, LGBTQ+ women and women with disabilities report experiencing more demeaning and alienating microaggressions. Compared with women overall, they’re more likely to have colleagues comment on their appearance or tell them that they “look mad” or “should smile more.”

View full-sized infographic with full text description

What can organizations do to help advance more women into leadership?

Science points to a series of steps organizations and individuals can take to help close the leadership gender gap.

Identify potential leaders early. One promising approach is the earlier identification of leadership potential , says Anna Marie Valerio, PhD, an executive coach and adjunct professor of psychology at New York University. This includes enabling potential leadership candidates to obtain a wealth of feedback at an early point in their careers, through assignments, mentoring, and coaching, all of which may allow them to develop their networks and demonstrate their ability to take on greater responsibilities.

“Giving women key experiences early in their careers helps give them the runway to be able to develop themselves and excel and go as far as their skills and abilities and motivation will take them,” said Valerio, author of the 2009 book Developing Women Leaders: A Guide for Men and Women in Organizations .

Establish mentorship programs that also focus on sponsorship. A host of studies tout the benefits of successful mentoring programs , including greater career success for individuals and higher levels of employee engagement, retention, and knowledge-sharing for organizations.

When it comes to mentors, however, it’s important that women seek out both mentors, who can provide career guidance, support, feedback, and knowledge, as well as sponsors, who go beyond the role of mentor and use their position and influence to proactively advocate for a junior employee’s advancement, says I/O psychologist Victoria Mattingly, PhD, founder and CEO of Mattingly Solutions, a workplace inclusion consulting firm.

“Research shows that sponsorship is more effective at helping advance into leadership positions than mentorship ,” Mattingly said. “Mentors are great as a sounding board and to provide guidance, but when the rubber hits the road, you need someone who will speak up for you when you’re not in the room.”

Support women in joining women-led professional organizations. Women also boost their leadership capabilities through joining women’s professional organizations , according to a 2023 study. Researchers surveyed members of a women-led professional organization in the southeastern United States and found that experiences within these women-led associations allow members to hone their leadership abilities, network with other women, work directly with and observe women leaders, and receive support from others to take on leadership roles.

“In turn, these members had increased leadership aspirations, more confidence in their leadership capabilities, and a more expansive view of leadership within their careers,” study authors wrote.

Organizations can encourage this by including professional development funds in their budgets to increase the ability of employees to take part in these groups.

Focus on allyship. Women aren’t the only ones who can help boost the number of female leaders, Mattingly said. Male executives who are trained on how to be allies are far more likely to speak up about incidents of gender inequality than men who are not trained in this approach, according to a 2018 study. “This happens because they are already in a position of power and they are not going to be penalized for speaking out the way a woman would,” said Mattingly, the study’s author.

Allies use their privilege and in-group status to support and advocate for those from a different, historically disadvantaged identity group, Mattingly said. Allyship should be examined through an intersectional lens as well, she added, with White women serving as allies for women of color, able-bodied allies for those with disabilities, or heterosexual allies for those within the LGBTQ+ community.

“It’s a matter of recognizing our privileges, working through biases that we all have as humans, and then leveraging that privilege to either step up or step back or step in and help those who have historically been left behind when it comes to advancing into leadership roles,” Mattingly said.

Thanks to these and other efforts around the globe empowering women to lead, the future of female leaders shows promise, Valerio said.

“We know so much more about this issue than we did 10 years ago, and we have the perspective of seeing what happens when you give people key experiences and the forums to learn from those experiences, and you give them mentors and coaches,” she said. “They are able to really make the strides they need to make, coupled with an attitude toward inclusion. I’m hopeful this may not even be an issue 10 years from now, though it will still require persistent effort for us to get there.”

Recommended Reading

• Once more: The rise of female leaders
• Speaking of Psychology: How women become leaders with Alice Eagly, PhD
• Speaking of Psychology: The challenges faced by women in leadership with Alice Eagly, PhD
• Society for the Psychology of Women (Division 35)
• Leadership Institute for Women in Psychology
• Celebrating Women’s History Month: How Women in Psychology Are Changing the World

You may also like

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

How Women Manage the Gendered Norms of Leadership

• Ronit Kark,
• Alyson Meister

Based on interviews with 64 female executives.

A wealth of research shows that female leaders, much more than male leaders, face the need to be warm and nice, as well as competent or tough. The problem is that these qualities are often seen as opposites. Alleviating this double bind requires changing our deeply-embedded societal expectations for what it means to be a woman and what it takes to lead. But until we get there, women still have to navigate the many tensions that come with leading. Researchers wanted to know how successful women experience and manage these paradoxical demands on a day-to-day basis. They interviewed 64 top-level women leaders from 51 different organizations in the United States. They found these women have to confront a number of paradoxes that stem from the need to be tough and nice, and they identified a few strategies these leaders use to manage them.

A wealth of research shows that female leaders, much more than their male counterparts , face the need to be warm and nice (what society traditionally expects from women), as well as competent or tough (what society traditionally expects from men and leaders). The problem is that these qualities are often seen as opposites. This creates a “catch-22” and “double bind” for women leaders. Carly Fiorina, the former CEO of HP, depicted it this way :  “In the chat rooms around Silicon Valley, from the time I arrived until long after I left HP, I was routinely referred to as either a “bimbo” or a “bitch”— too soft or too hard, and presumptuous, besides.”

• Wei Zheng is the Richard R. Roscitt Endowed Chair Professor in Leadership at Stevens Institute of Technology. Her research, teaching, and practice focus on leadership and diversity. Her research work has appeared in top  scholarly  and practitioner outlets. She is currently co-leading  Stevens Inclusive Leadership Certificate Program  to train inclusive leaders and  Stevens Leadership Portal  that disseminates actionable insights at the intersection of leadership, technology, and inclusivity.
• RK Ronit Kark is a full professor of leadership and organizational psychology in the department of psychology at Bar-Ilan University, Israel, and was the founder and director of the Gender in the Field Graduate Program. She is also a Distinguished Research Professor at the Exeter School of Business, UK, and an Anna Boyksen Awardee and Fellow for the Study of Gender and Diversity at the Technical University of Munich (TUM). She sits on different NGO boards to promote diversity and gender equity and is an academic nomad, traveling internationally to give keynote presentations and workshops on leadership and diversity topics.
• Alyson Meister is a professor of leadership and organizational behavior at IMD Business School in Lausanne, Switzerland. Specializing in the development of globally oriented, adaptive, and inclusive organizations, she has worked with thousands of executives, teams, and organizations from professional services to industrial goods and technology. Her research has been widely published, and in 2021, she was recognized as a Thinkers50 Radar thought leader.  

Partner Center

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

• Women and Leadership

Public Says Women are Equally Qualified, but Barriers Persist

Table of contents.

• Chapter 1: Women in Leadership
• Chapter 2: What Makes a Good Leader, and Does Gender Matter?
• Chapter 3: Obstacles to Female Leadership
• Appendix A: Survey Methodology

According to the majority of Americans, women are every bit as capable of being good political leaders as men. The same can be said of their ability to dominate the corporate boardroom. And according to a new Pew Research Center survey on women and leadership, most Americans find women indistinguishable from men on key leadership traits such as intelligence and capacity for innovation, with many saying they’re stronger than men in terms of being compassionate and organized leaders.

So why, then, are women in short supply at the top of government and business in the United States? According to the public, at least, it’s not that they lack toughness, management chops or proper skill sets.

It’s also not all about work-life balance. While economic research and previous survey findings have shown that career interruptions related to motherhood may make it harder for women to advance in their careers and compete for top executive jobs, relatively few adults in the new Pew Research survey point to this as a key barrier for women seeking leadership roles. 1 Only about one-in-five say women’s family responsibilities are a major reason there aren’t more females in top leadership positions in business and politics.

As a result, the public is divided about whether, even in the face of the major advances women have made in the workplace, the imbalance in corporate America will change in the foreseeable future. About half (53%) believe men will continue to hold more top executive positions in business in the future; 44% say it is only a matter of time before as many women are in top executive positions as men. Americans are less doubtful when it comes to politics: 73% expect to see a female president in their lifetime.

These findings are based on a new Pew Research Center survey of 1,835 randomly selected adults conducted online Nov. 12-21, 2014. The survey also finds that the public is divided over whether a woman with leadership aspirations is better off having children early on in her career (36%) or waiting until she is well established (40%). About one-in-five (22%) say the best option would be to not have children at all.

Getting the Job Done in Politics and Business

When it comes to characteristics that apply specifically to political and business leadership, most Americans don’t distinguish between men and women. But among those who do draw distinctions, women are perceived to have a clear advantage over men in some key areas.

Just as in the political realm, the public does not see major differences between men and women on key business leadership qualities. Where they do see gaps, women have a clear advantage over men on honesty and ethics, providing fair pay and benefits, and offering mentorship to young employees. Men have an edge when it comes to being willing to take risks and negotiating profitable deals.

Women in Leadership Today

As the 114 th Congress gets underway, a record number of women (104) will be serving in the House and Senate. Today women make up 19% of the Congress, about double the share from 20 years ago. Progress has been slower on the corporate front. Only 26 women are now serving as CEOs of Fortune 500 companies—roughly 5%. In 1995 there were none. Women are slightly better represented in corporate boardrooms than they are at the CEO level. As of 2013, about one-in-six board members of Fortune 500 companies (17%) were women, up from 10% in 1995. 2

The pipeline for female leaders seems to be widening. Women have made significant gains in educational attainment in recent decades, better positioning themselves not only for career success but also for leadership positions. Since the 1990s, women have outnumbered men in both college enrollment and college completion rates, reversing a trend that lasted through the 1960s and ’70s. And women today are more likely than men to continue their education after college.

Women have also made inroads into managerial positions and professional fields in recent decades. In 2013, over half of managerial and professional occupations in the U.S. (52.2%) were held by women, up from 30.6% in 1968. 3 Even so, women continue to lag far behind men in senior management positions. 4

Gender and Party Gaps in Views on Female Leadership

For women, the issue of having more female leaders goes far beyond equality in the workplace. Four-in-ten of them (38%) say having more women in top leadership positions in business and government would do a lot to improve the quality of life for all women. An additional 40% of women say this would have at least some positive impact on all women’s lives. For their part, men are less convinced that female leadership has such wide-ranging benefits. Only 19% of men say having more women in top leadership positions would do a lot to improve all women’s lives, while 43% say this would improve women’s lives somewhat.

When it comes to the barriers that may be holding women back from achieving greater representation in the top leadership ranks, women are much more likely than men to point to societal and institutional factors such as the country not being ready to elect more female political leaders and women being held to higher standards than men in business and in government.

Women are also more likely than men to say that female leaders in both politics and business outperform male leaders on most of the traits and characteristics tested in the survey. The gender gaps in perceptions about political leadership are especially sharp. Whether on compromise, honesty, backbone, persuasion or working for the benefit of all Americans, women are more likely than men to say female leaders do a better job. For their part, solid majorities of men say there aren’t major differences between men and women men in these areas. Nonetheless, they are somewhat more likely than women to give a nod to male leaders over female leaders on four of the five political leadership qualities tested in the poll.

Those who identify with the Democratic Party, which dominates the ranks of elected female leaders at the federal and state levels today, also have more favorable impressions of the women who serve in leadership positions in government and in business.

When it comes to political leadership, Democrats are significantly more likely than Republicans to say that women do a better job than men on each of the attributes tested in the poll. For their part, Republicans are not necessarily more likely to favor men in these areas, but they are more inclined to say there isn’t any difference between men and women.

Democratic women in particular are strong proponents of female political leaders. In most cases, they are more likely than both Democratic men and Republican women to say that female political leaders do a better job men.

The remainder of this report examines the current landscape of women in leadership in the U.S. and the public’s views on this topic. Chapter 1 lays out trends in female leadership in elected political office and in corporate America, as well as changes in the pipelines to top leadership positions. Chapter 2 looks at public attitudes on men, women and key leadership traits in both the political and business realms. And Chapter 3 explores the obstacles to leadership for women, as well as views about discrimination and the future of female leadership.

Other Key Findings

Women and men are seen as equally good business leaders, but gender stereotypes persist. Most Americans (54%) say men would do a better job running a professional sports team, while just 8% say women would be better at this. And a 46% plurality also give men the edge when it comes to running a large oil or gas company. But the public is two and a half times more likely to say a woman, rather than a man, would do a better job running a major hospital or a major retail chain.

Young adults are more likely than older generations to say women with leadership aspirations might want to delay having children. More than four-in-ten Millennials (46%) say a woman who wants to reach a top position in business is better off waiting to have children until she is well established in her career, while 29% say she should have children early in her career. By contrast, four-in-ten Boomers and nearly half (48%) of members of the Silent generation say it’s better for a woman with high-level business aspirations to have children early on.

Among partisans, Republican men are the most likely to say the country has taken the steps needed to achieve gender equality in the workplace. About half of Republican men (54%) say the country has made the changes needed to give men and women equality in the workplace. By contrast about two-thirds (66%) of Republican women say more changes are needed. Even larger majorities of Democratic and independent women and Democratic men agree that gender parity is still a work in progress.

A Note on Generations

Some of the analysis in this report looks at adults by generation. While the definitions of generations can differ slightly among researchers, this report relies on the following standard Pew Research definitions.

• Millennials : born after 1980, ages 18 to 33 in 2014. 5
• Generation X : born from 1965 to 1980, ages 34 to 49 in 2014.
• Baby Boomers : born from 1946 to 1964, ages 50 to 68 in 2014.
• The Silent Generation : born from 1928 to 1945, ages 69 to 86 in 2014. 6

About This Report

This report explores public attitudes about gender and leadership with a particular focus on leadership in U.S. politics and business. The analysis is based on two new Pew Research Center surveys. The main survey was conducted Nov. 12-21, 2014, among a sample of 1,835 adults – 921 women and 914 men – 18 years of age or older. The survey was conducted by the GfK Group using KnowledgePanel, its nationally representative online research panel. A second survey was conducted Nov. 20-23, 2014, among 1,004 adults, 18 years of age or older, living in the continental United States. This survey was conducted over the telephone (landline and cellular phone) under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International. For a more detailed description of the survey methodology, see Appendix A .

In addition to the surveys, this report draws on data from a variety of sources to document women in leadership positions in politics (national and state levels) and in business with trends over time.

This report is a collaborative effort based on the input and analysis of the following individuals. Claudia Deane, director of research practices, and Rich Morin, senior editor, provided editorial guidance. Kim Parker, director of social trends research, and Juliana Menasce Horowitz, associate director of research, designed the surveys and wrote the overview and two main survey chapters. Wendy Wang, senior researcher, and Anna Brown, research assistant, compiled the data for the chapter on female leadership. Wang wrote the chapter on female leadership. Brown and Eileen Patten, research analyst, number-checked the report. The report was copy-edited by Marcia Kramer of Kramer Editing Services. Michael Suh provided Web support. Find related reports online at www.pewresearch.org/pewresearch-org/social-trends .

• For more on working mothers and career interruptions, see Pew Research Center: “ On Pay Gap, Millennial Women Near Parity – For Now .” For more on the gender gap in the financial and corporate sectors, see Marianne Bertrand, et al., “ Dynamics of the Gender Gap for Young Professionals in the Financial and Corporate Sectors ” ↩
• Catalyst: Women CEOs of the Fortune 1000; Catalyst: Women in the United States . ↩
• Pew Research Center analysis of March Current Population Surveys (IPUMS), employed persons ages 16 and older in “managerial and professional specialty occupations.” ↩
• See “ Women in Business: From Classroom to Boardroom,” Grant Thornton, 2014 . ↩
• The youngest Millennials are in their teens. No chronological end point has been set for this group. ↩
• Adults who were born prior to 1928, sometimes referred to as the “Greatest Generation,” are not included in this analysis due to the small sample size. ↩

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Business & Workplace
• Economics, Work & Gender
• Gender & Leadership
• Gender & LGBTQ
• Gender & Work

A look at small businesses in the U.S.

A look at black-owned businesses in the u.s., 2023 saw some of the biggest, hardest-fought labor disputes in recent decades, do you tip more or less often than the average american, diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace, most popular, report materials.

• Omnibus Topline
• Interactive The Data on Women Leaders
• Gender and Leadership
• Gender and Leadership Omnibus

901 E St. NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20004 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center

More From Forbes

New study on women in leadership: good news, bad news and the way forward.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Women have gained and lost—but we can move forward.

The pandemic has been especially hard on women as many have had to opt out or reduce hours for the purposes of caregiving—caring for children, elders or friends. Some women have lost their jobs because of the shifts in the labor market. But women have also found success in the workforce and have seen progress as well—from demonstrating effective leadership to positively influencing their organizations.

Data provide a clear window on the state of women in leadership—including both gains and losses. The insights are sobering, but also enlightening. Our opportunity is to build resilience: By understanding reality and making sense of it, we can become more resilient, solve problems and innovate toward greater happiness, fulfillment and achievement.

Women Are Strong Leaders

Historically, there has been debate about women’s performance in leadership. As frustrating as the very existence of that debate may be, it has also catalyzed research which reinforces the effective contributions women make.

Effectiveness . A sweeping meta-analysis from Florida International University examined 99 data sets from academic research sources—including journal articles, white papers, books and dissertations. The study finds women and men do not differ in their perceived effectiveness as leaders. Assessing feedback on leaders and the extent to which they are judged competent and capable, there is no statistical differences between men and women.

Leadership Behaviors . In addition, women are performing well in multiple aspects of leadership. A new study of 423 companies across the US and Canada by McKinsey & Company and Leanin.org finds women are better than men at providing emotional support to employees (19% of men compared with 31% of women) and checking in on the wellbeing of employees (54% compared with 61%). In addition, they are better at helping employees navigate work-life challenges (24% of men compared with 29% of women) and taking action to prevent or manage employee burnout (16% compared with 21%). Women also spend more time contributing to diversity, equity and inclusion efforts (7% of men compared with 11% of women).

Best Travel Insurance Companies

Best covid-19 travel insurance plans.

Preferences for Women . In addition, people welcome having women as their leaders. A recent study from ResumeLab finds 38% of people prefer to work for a female boss compared with 26% who prefer to work for a man. In addition, 35% of respondents have no preference. When asked whether they are better at leadership, 38% believe women outperform men while 35% believe men are better in leadership roles.

The Bias Is Real

Despite women’s strong leadership, bias still exists.

Qualification and Decision Making . A study of 1,529 respondents by the Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf in Germany finds people report women are less qualified for leadership than their male counterparts based on perceptions of how women think and process issues. In the ResumeLab study, 45% of respondents believe women are more likely to follow their emotions when making a decision, while men are more likely to use logical thinking when making decisions.

The Likability Bias . Studies published in The Economic Journal show there is a likeability bias when it comes to women . If women aren’t perceived as likable, people will demonstrate less cooperation and less support for the women’s efforts. The same dynamic is not evident with men. Those who are not perceived as likable do not pay a price in terms of the cooperation or support they receive.   

Trust through Crisis . On the other hand, women tend to benefit from a trust advantage. According to research at Lehigh University and Queen's University Belfast , when people are in a crisis situation, they are more likely to trust women to take care of them and lead them to a safe outcome. While this may seem like good news, it is still limiting for women because it speaks to a perception of qualification based on gender alone, not skills, competence or experience.

The Implications

The biases have consequences for everyone and, in particular, women.

Higher Standards . Women are perceived to be held to a higher standard than men. For example, a study of 600 women business owners by Groupon finds they believe they are held to a more rigorous standard when accessing capital or seeking mentors. Relatedly, the ResumeLab study finds 55% of respondents believe women in managerial positions are held to higher performance standards than men.

Media Portrayals. Portrayals of women in the media make a difference as well, because they tend to reinforce stereotypes. Fully 59% of ResumeLab survey participants believe women are under-represented as managers and 52% see them as over-represented in support functions.

Under-Representation in Leadership . All of this has real implications for women. The pipeline for women in leadership has many leaks where women fall out of the progression toward higher-level roles. The McKinsey/LeanIn study finds 48% of entry-level positions, but only 24% of C-suite are occupied by women. In fact, women lose ground at every step of the hierarchical pipeline, but they lose the most ground at the opportunity to enter management.

We all have a role to play in creating the conditions for women's success and fulfillment.

The Way Forward

So how can we—women and all genders—create the conditions for reduced bias and accelerated progress for women?

First, we can manage our own biases and language . We can be aware of our own biases and work to reduce them. One aspect of bias is linguistic determinism which describes the fact that language matters: How we refer to people and situations affects how we perceive them. A study in the Sex Roles journal finds we use different language to describe men and women and this can be limiting. Recognize the terms you use to describe women and other genders, and focus on discussions about skills, competencies and capabilities that are gender neutral.

Second, women can bring their own talents forward . Women will do well to recognize their strengths and demonstrate their capabilities every day, rather than shying away from situations because of bias. When women bring their best, they contribute to their organizations and communities. We all have an instinct to matter and applying talents for the benefit of family, communities and organizations is good for all kinds of wellbeing.

Third, women can care for themselves . Women who work hard and also set boundaries and take time away tend to have greater levels of wellbeing and mental health. Find work which aligns with your interests as much as possible, attend to your physical health and invest time in creating and sustaining meaningful relationships.

Fourth we can use our influence to shape the conditions for women’s success and advancement. Sociologically speaking, the primary way we learn is through watching, listening and experiencing others around us. This means each woman’s choices and behaviors have a powerful effect on those around her. Women can help other women and all genders, supporting them and contributing to cultures and systems where there is a high level of respect, value and inclusion for all kinds of differences. We can also contribute to the systemic and structural elements that foster success for women—creating policies and programs for all phases of life and employment from attraction, hiring and promotion to caregiving and flexible work—empowering and enabling women for career growth and advancement.

The news is good about women’s capability, resilience and effectiveness. The bad news is women still face tremendous headwinds in terms of biases. But women can find their strength, express their voice and apply their talents. They can also shape the conditions for others, supporting and influencing the systems which make the world welcoming for women’s contributions. The state of women’s progress in the workplace and in leadership isn’t just a women’s issue. It is an issue for all of us—so we can build communities where we can tap into the very best from each of us.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Ohio State nav bar

• BuckeyeLink
• Find People
• Search Ohio State

Why Women Are Better Leaders

Speaking at a private event on leadership, former U.S. president Barack Obama said, “I’m absolutely confident that for two years if every nation on earth was run by women, you would see a significant improvement across the board on just about everything... living standards and outcomes." [1]

Obama’s statement may not be that farfetched because leadership researchers have decades of data from actual leaders to support this.

Very interesting results were discovered during two studies that examined gender differences in leadership effectiveness based on data from thousands of leaders. [2] , [3] These studies, where data was summarized across 99 samples of leadership studies, found that when looking at data from all sources (a combination of self and other ratings), it seems that that there were no gender differences in leadership effectiveness.

However, they discovered that when it comes to self-rated leadership effectiveness, male managers tend to give themselves higher leadership effectiveness ratings than female managers do. Meanwhile, if we only look at ratings from other sources (i.e., supervisors and subordinates), female managers receive higher leadership effectiveness ratings than their male counterparts. 

So why women are better leaders?

Leadership is one’s ability to influence others to achieve common goals. To accomplish this, a leader needs to possess skills that can effectively communicate goals, motivate others, help others improve, give support when needed and ensure the well-being of their subordinates.

Survey results from both supervisors and subordinates showed that people believe female leaders are better at both communicating with others and showing consideration. [4]

In a study that examined gender and leadership styles, researchers found that, compared to male leaders, female leaders use more transformational leadership (inspiring, caring and encouraging) and also engage in more of the contingent reward behaviors (this for that in a consistent manner). Meanwhile, male leaders tend to adopt manage by exception style (only intervene when problems become severe) along with the lassiez-faire leadership style (absent when needed). [5]

What does this mean?

Compared to male leaders, female leaders are more likely to attend to followers’ personal needs, be open to new ideas and others’ opinions, and reward the satisfactory performance of followers in a consistent manner. On the other hand, male leaders are statistically more likely to only stress meeting the standards, wait until problems become severe before attending to them, and/or withdraw or be absent during critical junctures.

Furthermore, studies show females are less narcissistic than males. [6] Thus, female leaders tend to adopt democratic or participative style and a less autocratic or directive style than men. [7] This study also points out that the traditional gender stereotype that female leaders tend to focus more on interpersonal aspects — as opposed to task-oriented aspects of leadership — does not hold up in the analyses.

Simply put, female leaders don’t emphasize completion of tasks less and more on interpersonal relationships than their male counterparts do.

If females are such great leaders, why there are still less female leaders across all levels and in all fields?

In one study conducted by the author of this article, female leaders were found to have the tendency to underestimate their leadership abilities in many areas. [8] Therefore, it is possible that they are less confident when it comes to asking for a raise or a promotion. Other social and cultural factors can also lead to such an outcome. But they are rather complicated and we can discuss them another day. Be sure to stay tuned to Lead Read Today for that update.

In the meantime, if you are interested, you may find this white paper on factors that affect female career success helpful.

References 

[1] Asher, S. (December 16, 2019). Barack Obama: Women are better leaders than men. BBC News. 

[2] Paustian-Underdahl, S. C., Walker, L. S., & Woehr, D. J. (2014). Gender and perceptions of leadership effectiveness: A meta-analysis of contextual moderators. Journal of applied psychology , 99 , 1129-1147.

[3] Eagly, A.H., Karau, S.J., & Makhijani, M.G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 117 , 125-145.

[4] Vecchio, R. P., & Anderson, R. J. (2009). Agreement in self–others' ratings of leader effectiveness: The role of demographics and personality. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 17 , 165−179.

[5] Eagly, A.H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M.C., & Engen, M.L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129 , 569-591.

[6] Grijalva, E., Newman, D. A., Tay, L., Donnellan, M. B., Harms, P. D., Robins, R. W., & Yan, T. (2015). Gender differences in narcissism: A meta-analytic review. Psychological bulletin , 141 , 261-310.

[7] Eagly, Eagly A.H., & Johnson, B. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108 , 233-256.

[8] Li, M. (February 26, 2019). On leader’s self-awareness . Lead Read Today , [Research White Paper].

Related Articles

Disclaimer Here at Lead Read Today, we endeavor to take an objective (rational, scientific) approach to analyzing leaders and leadership. All opinion pieces will be reviewed for appropriateness, and the opinions shared are solely of the author and not representative of The Ohio State University or any of its affiliates.

©2024 Fisher College of Business

2100 Neil Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210

If you have a disability and experience difficulty accessing this site, please contact us for assistance .

OpenID Connect login

Essay on Women in Leadership

Students are often asked to write an essay on Women in Leadership in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Women in Leadership

Introduction.

Women in leadership is an important issue. Leaders shape our societies and when women are leaders, they bring unique perspectives and solutions.

Historical Context

Modern times.

Today, more women are leaders in politics, business, and other fields. They are proving that women can lead effectively.

Benefits of Women Leaders

Women leaders often focus on cooperation, empathy, and long-term thinking. These qualities can lead to better decisions and outcomes.

250 Words Essay on Women in Leadership

Women have been historically underrepresented in leadership roles, a disparity that has roots in societal norms and gender stereotypes. However, the 21st century has seen significant strides in challenging these norms, with more women assuming leadership positions across various sectors.

Changing Landscape

The landscape of leadership is changing, with an increasing number of women breaking the glass ceiling. This shift is not just a matter of equality, but also of optimizing organizational performance. Studies have shown that companies with women in executive positions tend to outperform those without, indicating that gender diversity can be a competitive advantage.

Challenges and Opportunities

Despite the progress, women in leadership continue to face unique challenges. Stereotypes persist, and women are often expected to demonstrate leadership styles that conform to traditionally masculine norms. However, the evolving understanding of effective leadership is creating opportunities for women. Emotional intelligence, transformational leadership, and collaborative decision-making—strengths often associated with women—are being recognized as valuable leadership traits.

The rise of women in leadership roles is a testament to societal progress towards gender equality. While challenges remain, the changing perception of leadership presents an opportunity for further progress. The future of leadership is not just about having more women leaders, but about redefining leadership in a way that values and leverages the unique strengths and perspectives that women bring to the table.

500 Words Essay on Women in Leadership

The perception of women in leadership roles has undergone a significant transformation throughout history. Despite the numerous challenges they have faced, women have demonstrated exceptional leadership abilities, breaking the glass ceiling in various sectors worldwide.

The Evolution of Women in Leadership

Challenges faced by women leaders.

Despite the progress, women leaders continue to face unique challenges. Stereotypes and biases persist, often resulting in a credibility gap for women leaders. The ‘double bind’ dilemma is another challenge, where women leaders are perceived as either too soft or too hard. The balance between personal life and career is another significant hurdle, with societal expectations often demanding more from women leaders.

The Leadership Style of Women

Women leaders often exhibit transformational leadership styles, focusing on collaboration, empathy, and communication. They tend to encourage participation, share power and information, and aim to enhance the self-worth of their followers. This style of leadership fosters a positive work environment and boosts productivity and job satisfaction.

Impact of Women in Leadership

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

• IE Corporate Relations
• IE University

Female Leadership: The Impact on Organizations

Female entrepreneurship and the presence of women on management teams have a positive influence on the social motivations and achievements of organizations. Women’s management style tends to foster work-family balance, environmental awareness, and the participation of all team members. This style is especially evident in the new cooperative entrepreneurial context. In Brazil, where women and men account for similar percentages of the country’s business owners, this cultural shift has helped women to become more assertive and develop a stronger sense of identity. In any region, women’s participation in entrepreneurial activity is essential for both the family economy and the national economy.

Women’s presence on management teams is generally associated with a stronger social commitment and a more participatory leadership style. An analysis of women’s impact at cooperative enterprises—which have specific characteristics in terms of organization and purpose—shows that their influence leads to greater motivation and better results. One benefit of female leadership is an increase in measures to promote work-family balance, which is important for country development as well as for improving families’ quality of life.

Female entrepreneurship and the presence of women on management teams have a positive influence on the social motivations and achievements of organizations. With women at the helm, companies are more inclined to introduce family-friendly policies. Today’s new cooperative entrepreneurial context is more conducive to this sort of approach than the traditional business world. In fact, community-based enterprises have emerged as key instruments of women’s empowerment.

Greater growth of capacity development can be achieved by promoting this entrepreneurial ecosystem at the collective level, without singling out heroic individual entrepreneurs. From a participatory point of view, these new female business leaders have a greater impact and influence on their organizations’ activities than they would be able to have at traditional companies. This was the conclusion of a recent study that highlighted an example of a place where such a dynamic is being developed. Today’s female leaders face the challenge of figuring out how to have a more tangible influence on mixed-gender management teams. Cooperatives provide the best opportunity for women to achieve this goal.

Today’s female leaders face the challenge of figuring out how to have a more tangible influence on mixed-gender management teams.

Different perceptions and sensibilities

Greater female decision-making power could lead to a new strategic orientation that differs from plans designed by exclusively male teams. Human resources policies might be the first area targeted for change, with the aim of fostering work-family balance. It should come as no surprise that multiple studies have concluded that women in business prefer to maintain a balance between work and family life, delaying, in some cases, their growth as business leaders. Similarly, data show that an organization’s gender composition influences its objectives, with the social component accounting for a larger share of its main challenges. These sensibilities—different from those of men—also spread to other aspects of the company, such as respect for the environment and operational ethics.

Given this profile and the equality gap at traditional companies, it seems clear that the cooperative formula is a better fit for female leadership. The idiosyncrasy of these enterprises—their collective business spirit and community participation in decision-making—is well aligned with women’s management style. Moreover, the cooperative movement is better suited to the objectives and strategy of shared growth and the struggle against social inequality.

Social impact

In light of these factors, it is clear that an increase in the number of female executives at cooperative enterprises would have a social impact by boosting motivation and performance. This impact would translate into, for example, greater participation in decision-making by all members of the organization, assistance for people in the community, self-management, and greater environmental awareness.

However, increasing the number of female executives at cooperative entities remains a challenge because women face more conflicts than men do when they decide to pursue a business career.

Motherhood, marriage, and of course household chores are the traditional obstacles that have prevented women from achieving a balance between business and family. Their professional role has tended to come into conflict with these other roles. But nowadays, female leaders are trying to overcome these obstacles by introducing policies that favor work-family balance.

Women in business prefer to maintain a balance between work and family life, delaying, in some cases, their growth as business leaders.

The case of Brazil

Brazil, the world’s fourth largest economy and fifth most populous country, provides a clear example of cultural change and economic growth . The number of women in the Brazilian workforce has increased gradually since the 1970s. Brazil is an interesting country to study because it has a large population base working in cooperative enterprises and considerable influence on the global economy and politics.

Women now account for nearly half of Brazil’s workforce and a similar percentage of the country’s business owners. Things have changed a lot in the past few decades, and gender roles that were once clearly defined are now being challenged. Although challenges remain, this cultural shift in Brazilian society has led to three major conclusions regarding women:

• They are becoming more assertive as they acquire more economic independence.
• They are now more likely to maintain their careers after getting married.
• They now have more self-esteem and a stronger sense of identity within their area of activity.

In conclusion, entrepreneurial activity is a path to self-realization and contribution to society, and women’s participation in this process is important for both the family economy and the national economy. The study found that a higher percentage of women on a founding team has a positive influence on the organization’s social motivations and achievements but does not appear to influence its social challenges.

Methodology of the Brazil study

The study relied on data from the Solidarity Economic Enterprise Database, which the Brazilian government created between 2009 and 2013 by surveying 19,708 organizations from all of Brazil’s states. The surveyed organizations provided information on a variety of topics, including the motives behind the creation of the business, the social goals achieved, current profits, and human resources policies.

The study sample focused on businesses whose main economic activity is production and commercialization. It included 1,365 companies that were founded with a social motivation, 1,695 with social goals, and 12,146 with policies to foster work-family balance.

© IE Insights.

The Don’t-Do Guide to Business-Driven Positive Change

The entrepreneur's dilemma: knowledge vs. funding in africa, pitching the mind and heart, entrepreneurs in search of a company, would you like to receive ie insights.

Sign up for our Newsletter

RELATED CONTENT

Business leaders are often committed to driving positive change, but how exactly can they do this? Concepción Galdón uses insights from social entrepreneurs to provide practical guidance on how to create meaningful impact.

The Entrepreneur’s Dilemma: Knowledge vs. Funding in Africa

Asia’s Prospects

Making Money and a Positive Impact

It’s a Matter of Trust

To Be Sustainable Is to Be Competitive

Latest news.

We use both our own and third-party cookies to enhance our services and to offer you the content that most suits your preferences by analysing your browsing habits. Your continued use of the site means that you accept these cookies. You may change your settings and obtain more information here .

Privacy Preference Center

Consent management, web analytics.

We use both our own and third-party cookies to enhance our services and to offer you the content that most suits your preferences by analysing your browsing habits. Your continued use of the site means that you accept these cookies.

Cookies Used

Share on Mastodon

ESSAY SAUCE

FOR STUDENTS : ALL THE INGREDIENTS OF A GOOD ESSAY

Essay: Women in leadership

Essay details and download:.

• Subject area(s): Management essays
• Reading time: 6 minutes
• Price: Free download
• Published: 27 October 2015*
• Last Modified: 27 October 2015
• File format: Text
• Words: 1,548 (approx)
• Number of pages: 7 (approx)

Text preview of this essay:

This page of the essay has 1,548 words. Download the full version above.

‘Women in leadership’ is a phenomena that has obtained many attention over the past couple of years. Nowadays more young woman graduate of Universities, yet the amount of female leader seems remarkable low (in 2012 only 16,6%). Many research has been accomplished in order to find out the differences between male and female leadership styles, the challenges women face in organisations, the traits women have to make and the influence of stereotyping on men and women. A significant number of organisations have diverse teams and claim they acknowledge the advantages of female leadership styles and know the positive influence of women in the organisation. Nevertheless, the traditional roles at home, the stereotyping and the ‘boys networking clubs’ seem to make it difficult for women on their way to the top. Even though organisations state they offer equal chances for men and women, women continue to make more traits and face more obstacles due to gender-based assumptions. Women and female leaders still face discrimination in organisations. This essay discusses reasons why women face discrimination, such as the communication style of women, work/family balance, stereotyping and networking based on academic research, statistical data, examples and expert quotes.

First of all women face discrimination, because organisations find a women’s communication style to emotional to be a representative leader. According to von Hippel et al. (2011, 1313) who held research about the stereotyping of women and compared a lot of research reports, state that a women’s communication style is focused on emotional, indirect and elaborate components, while a men’s communication style is instrumental, direct and compact. Another research report of Groysberg and Bell ( 2013 ) argues about the gender gap in the CEO-suite, argues that 8% of the women and 11% of the men state women have more interpersonal skills and show more empathy (Gorysberg & Dell 2013, 93). The findings about women their communication style confirm women are seen as less competent than men, because women do not show the male skills such as assertiveness (Eagly & Karau, 2002, Heilman, Wallen, Fuchs, & Tamkins, 2004, 1313).

However, women’s communication style is perceived as ‘better’ than men’s communication style. According to researchers Eberly & Fong (2013, 709) on ‘leading via heart and mind’ leaders need to have the skills to recognize their emotions and the influence of their emotions on their employees. Leaders who are emotionally intelligent are better in identifying emotional needs of a situation (Humprey et al., 2008). The ability of emotionally intelligence leads to managing the emotions of oneself and their employees, can achieve a positive work surrounding and leads to better employee performance and motivation (Eberly & Fong 2013, 709). Furthermore, one respondent in a report of Vecchio (2003, 835) about the gender advantage states the following quote about female leadership: ‘Every study I’m aware of finds that women managers are more effective than men in decision making, analysis, so-called people skills and communications. Women have emotional x-ray vision. And they deliver results.’ -a female marketing consultant (Kleiman, 2003). On the other hand, women have a lack of authority and therefore women are perceived as less competent leaders (Hippel et al. 2011, 1313). As a result women seem less qualified for leadership positions (Hippel et al. 2011, 1313). According to Powell, Butterfield & Parent (2002) Schein (1975, 1313) the masculine characterises such as assertiveness and self-reliance, are seen as indicators for effective leadership style. Although research confirms women’s communication style leads to better performance, research indicates women still seem to suffer under the gender-based advantages of men.

Secondly, women face discrimination because organisations and men assume they put family first under all circumstances. According to Ely, Stone, and Ammerman (2014, 103), who surveyed more than 25,000 HBS graduates to collect data about women in leadership, conclude women and men think women develop more slowly due to the assumption that women find family more important than their career. 77 % of the HBS graduates state choosing family over work is holding women back to make a career (Ely, Stone, Ammerman 2014, 104). Also, more than 75% of the men expects their wife to take care of the children instead of having a career (Ely, Stone, Ammerman 2014, 106). Men still expect women to adjust their career to the traditional roles. Furthermore, more than half of the men finds their career more important than their wives career and think their career deserves more priority (Ely, Stone, Ammerman 2014, 106). Another notable assumption is that women are most of the time not considered for international opportunities (Gorysberg & Dell 2013, 91). For example, directors still assume women find it more difficult than men to leave their family for travelling or relocating due to work(Gorysberg & Dell 2013, 91). This leads to unequal chance for international functions.

On the contrary, women do leave the company due to child care and they start working part-time. According to Ely, Stone & Ammerman (2014, 104) women do leave the company to take care of the children. According to Sheryl Sandberg (CEO Facebook) women give up their career ambitions to have a family. Pip Jamieson, a business consultant and leadership coach, interviewed more than twenty senior female and male leaders about the differences of men and women in business. One of her respondents stated the following about working mothers (Jamieson, 2010, 36): ‘To be quite honest I could never do what I am doing if I had children.’ However, only 11% leaves the company due to fulltime childcare, the rest of the women are simply seeking for other jobs because their current jobs are not fulfilling enough (Ely, Stone & Ammerman 2014, 105). Many women do start working part-time and then never climb up the ladder. This might be true, but that has a reasonable explanation. Organisations still do not offer challenging and professional part-time jobs for working mothers (Ely, Stone & Ammerman 2014, 105). As a result, women have a lack in professional experience and that is why they cannot make it to the top (Ely, Stone & Ammerman 2014, 105). Also according to Sheryl Sandberg and Pip Jamieson, a work-life balance is hard for women. Many women are comparing themselves with fulltime mothers or fulltime workers (Sandberg, 2013). Women are self-critics and are eager to fulfil every role perfectly (Jamieson, 2010, 36). Sandberg states that the responsibilities at home should be balanced, however according to Ely, Stone & Ammerman (2014, 105) men are still traditional about the child care responsibilities. Also, organisations need to offer more family-friends benefits such as flexible working hours and child care for both men and women (Eagly & Carli, 2007, 69-70). The services organisations offer seem not to be sufficient enough to let mothers work.

Thirdly, women face discrimination because they are often shut out in networking events or meetings. According to Gloysberg & Connolly (2013, 71) who interviewed 24 CEO’s about diverse and inclusive organisations, state that seven of the CEOs said that being shut out from networks and conversations leads to less development and promotion of an employee. Men seem to shut out women. For example, Woods Staten (CEO Arcos Dorados, largest operator of McDonald’s), confirms that men ignore women and bond with other men by drinking together and meet up after meetings (Gloysberg & Connolly 2013, 71). According to Barry Salzberg (CEO Deloite) women have to deal with the ‘old boys’ network’: a typical masculine environment when they do fun activities like play golf and where it is difficult for women to fit in meetings (Gloysberg & Connolly 2013, 71).

Women may have the feeling they are excluded, but women do not participate in networking meetings. According to Gregory-Mina (2012, 66) who provided a literature review about gender issues, debates that women are less likely to take part of networking events due to family-work balance. Also women have less success in networking, because they want to use networking for social support and men want to use it for career growth (Gregory-Mina 2012, 69). However, organisations still do not offer enough mentoring opportunities for women. When organisations offer mentoring opportunities and they provide a male mentor, access to networks for women becomes easier (Gregory-Mina 2012, 69). According to Gloysberg & Connolly (2013, 75) organisations can offer sponsoring resource groups or mentoring in order to let women network. Also Sheryl Sandberg (2013, 87) states women should get a mentor in order to motivate women to climb up the ladder and become successful.

In summary, women and female leaders still face discrimination in organisations due to their communication skills, gender-based assumptions and exclusion of networks. A female communication style is the opposite of male communication style and the male communication style tends to be more effective. Another reason why women face discrimination is because of the assumption organisations and men seem to have that women chose family above all. Thirdly, women are excluded of networking opportunities. Yet, the opposites states that the emotional intelligence of women has positive impacts on employees and their productivity. However, women still suffer a lack of authority due to the male communication style. Furthermore women do leave the company to take care of the children. Nevertheless, they want to come back and work on their career, but organisations still do not offer enough family-friends benefits. At last, women leave after networking events which may indicate women do not want to network. On the contrary, they would like to network but they need a mentor that supports them and gives them advice. It is obvious that the prejudices of female behaviour still rule the organisations and the society. Companies should provide mentors to increase the access to networks, directors should embrace the female communication style and organisations should offer family-friend benefits. In that way the gender barriers will overcome and women will get more chances to climb up the ladder.

...(download the rest of the essay above)

About this essay:

If you use part of this page in your own work, you need to provide a citation, as follows:

Essay Sauce, Women in leadership . Available from:<https://www.essaysauce.com/management-essays/essay-women-in-leadership/> [Accessed 18-08-24].

These Management essays have been submitted to us by students in order to help you with your studies.

* This essay may have been previously published on Essay.uk.com at an earlier date.

Essay Categories:

• Accounting essays
• Architecture essays
• Business essays
• Computer science essays
• Criminology essays
• Economics essays
• Education essays
• Engineering essays
• English language essays
• Environmental studies essays
• Essay examples
• Finance essays
• Geography essays
• Health essays
• History essays
• Hospitality and tourism essays
• Human rights essays
• Information technology essays
• International relations
• Leadership essays
• Linguistics essays
• Literature essays
• Management essays
• Marketing essays
• Mathematics essays
• Media essays
• Medicine essays
• Military essays
• Miscellaneous essays
• Music Essays
• Nursing essays
• Philosophy essays
• Photography and arts essays
• Politics essays
• Project management essays
• Psychology essays
• Religious studies and theology essays
• Sample essays
• Science essays
• Social work essays
• Sociology essays
• Sports essays
• Types of essay
• Zoology essays

50 Years of Breakthroughs and Barriers: Women in Economics, Policy, and Leadership

This paper provides an overview of what has happened over the past fifty years for women as they worked to break through professional barriers in economics, policy, and institutional leadership. We chart the progress of women in higher education at the college level and beyond and then go on to examine women’s representation at the upper levels of academia, government, law, medicine, and management. We begin our description of trends in 1972 when Title IX was enacted, prohibiting sex-based discrimination in federally funded educational programs. The data paint a picture of considerable progress but also persistent inequities. We then go on to consider possible explanations for the continuing gender differences and some of the empirical evidence on the factors identified.

This paper was produced for a conference in memory and honor of Rebecca M. Blank, held at the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago on February 22-23, 2024. We are grateful for the helpful comments of Leslie McGranahan, Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, and participants at this conference. We also thank David Titus for excellent research assistance. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research.

MARC RIS BibTeΧ

Download Citation Data

Working Groups

More from nber.

In addition to working papers , the NBER disseminates affiliates’ latest findings through a range of free periodicals — the NBER Reporter , the NBER Digest , the Bulletin on Retirement and Disability , the Bulletin on Health , and the Bulletin on Entrepreneurship  — as well as online conference reports , video lectures , and interviews .

Women in Power: Female Leadership Essay

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

Introduction

Women, work and family, women and the top jobs, works cited.

Over the years, women have always received a raw deal in the society that is male dominated. For quite a long time, the boy child was favored over the girl child. An increasing number of women activists are, however, out to see to it that this negative trend is dealt a death blow. To a great extent, their efforts are bearing fruit and now, many leaders are now able to see the strengths in women.

The Globe and Mail presents works by different authors to try and get people to look at women differently. There are concerns on whether the corporate and political arena in Canada is biased towards women and in some cases questions arise as to whether women have to work really hard to succeed in a male dominated world.

Despite the fact that a good number of successful women exist at different ranks in Canada’s business sector, their efforts are not really recognized and they not seen as being well equipped to lead organizations (McNish 1). According to Gillis (1), there is a big concern about the way women are underrepresented at senior management levels within corporate organizations.

According to McFarland (1), the heavy demands that family places on women are to blame for bringing an end to careers of most women. While working in Ontario as deputy minister of executive resources, Ms. Pat Jacobsen almost resigned when she gave birth to a baby girl in 1984 (McFarland 1).

Previously, it was not possible to come by women with children in management. As pointed out by McFarland, it was quite a big challenge for Ms. Jacobsen to balance between work and taking care of the baby and the reason behind her near departure from employment (McFarland 1). She notes that there were no proper support systems that could allow women to effectively juggle between work and family.

In the case of Ms. Jacobsen, she managed to survive thanks to the great support she received from her superior. With her superior’s permission, she was able to work part time for two years despite the fact that her job was quite demanding. She is strongly convinced that the women in the earlier generations had to pay a big price to make it with little or no support (McFarland 1). Even so, Ms. Jacobsen feels guilty that she never really got to spend enough time with her daughter during her early days (McFarland 1).

For many years, there have been concerns regarding the capability of women in high positions of power. According to McNish & McFarland (1), a big population of men strongly believes that women are not yet ready for top leadership in organizations. One will therefore only find a small percentage of women in top Canadian jobs.

The situation is not different in Canada’s political arena as women constitute only 22% of the total number of the country’s members of parliament (McNish & McFarland 1). A study by Galloway revealed that even though the government had made efforts to reserve several federal seats for women, the challenge was implementation. Many alleged that the government lacked the necessary commitment (Galloway 1).

According to Grant (1) Canada is ranked at position twenty globally when it comes to gender equality with huge salary differences between men and women. Canada is, however, said to have made remarkable improvement over the previous years (Grant 1). Although women have been reported to complain about this imbalance, nothing much has changed. McNish and McFarland also pointed out that there are many professional female employees stuck in middle level management with no promising future (1).

Despite the number of women employees being quite high in the Canadian banking sector, no female employee has ever been given the opportunity to serve at the highest level in any bank (McNish & McFarland 1). Ed Clark, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Toronto Dominion Bank, confessed that although he was sure that a woman will head a bank at some point, it was not meant to be any where in the near future (McNish & McFarland 1).

This was quite a statement, especially coming from a man who had women promotion as a priority. The situation about women in top leadership is so bad that Lorraine Mitchelmore, a female president of an oil company had to be identified as Mr. Mitchelmore on the media (McNish & McFarland 1).

According to certain people, women are not ambitious enough to fight their way to the top. Other hindrances are a lack of good mentorship and tight work schedules that make it tough for them to work and take care of family (McNish & McFarland 2). Another school of thought argues that the task of getting qualified women is a nightmare and there are always claims that it is not easy to find enough qualified women for the top jobs (Galloway 1).

Although men have for a very long time dominated top leadership in organizations globally, there is clear evidence that certain organizations entrusted to women leadership have excelled greatly and this has proved that women are very talented leaders (McNish & McFarland 1).

According to McNish (1), the poor attitude towards women and leadership has contributed to some women opting for employment with foreign companies so as to realize their dreams of becoming Chief Executive Officers. A retired chair of Xerox Corp argued that it is impossible for an organization that is male dominated to have a diverse and inclusive kind of a labor force that is necessary to forcefully advance the organization’s agenda (McNish 1).

Over the years the false impression among men that women are incapable of offering great leadership has slowly faded with many people now realizing that women have a great potential to provide effective leadership and even succeed where men have failed. With the number of women with university degrees increasing, and constituting nearly half of the entire Canadian work force senior leaders are waking up to the fact that they need to tap into the great qualities that women have (Gillis 1).

Gillis further explains that when an organization turns its focus to dealing with gender inequality, it is not just about promoting women who are less qualified (1). It has to do with addressing existing barriers and creating a level play ground where both men and women are presented with equal opportunities to excel in their respective careers. Every employee must have that equal chance to rise up to the top most position in the organization (Gillis 1).

Advocates of women rights are convinced that an organization will be doing a big injustice if it was to only depend on male employees while over looking the talented female work force. According to Gillis, having a good mix of men and women on a decision making table is quite healthy for the business and must be encouraged (Gillis 1).

Galloway, Gloria. Ruling Tories leave gender out of the hiring equation. Toronto: The Globe and Mail Inc. 2011. Web.

Gillis, Deborah. More women in the workplace is good for business. Toronto: The Globe and Mail Inc. 2011. Web.

Grant, Tavia. Canada lags in gender gap ranking. Toronto: The Globe and Mail Inc. 2011. Web.

McFarland, Janet. How a stellar career was almost cut short by a baby. Toronto: The Globe and Mail Inc. 2011. Web.

McNish, Jacquie. Canadian corporate female stars strike career gold with foreign employers. Toronto: The Globe and Mail Inc. 2011. Web.

McNish, Jacquie & McFarland, Janet. Why the executive suite is the final frontier for women. Toronto: The Globe and Mail Inc. 2011. Web.

• Young Opinion on Homosexuality
• Gender Studies: Gays and Lesbians Issues in 1940's and 1950's
• "Songcather" Drama Film by Maggie Greenwald
• The "Fyre Festival" Documentary by Chris Smith
• Aspects of Leininger’s Nursing Theory
• Grunge, Riot Grrrl and the Forgetting of Women in Popular Culture': Article Summary
• Gender Analysis on Personal Experience
• Should Homosexuality be Legalized?
• Women and Power
• 19th Century Norms of Marriage
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2018, October 11). Women in Power: Female Leadership. https://ivypanda.com/essays/women-in-power/

"Women in Power: Female Leadership." IvyPanda , 11 Oct. 2018, ivypanda.com/essays/women-in-power/.

IvyPanda . (2018) 'Women in Power: Female Leadership'. 11 October.

IvyPanda . 2018. "Women in Power: Female Leadership." October 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/women-in-power/.

1. IvyPanda . "Women in Power: Female Leadership." October 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/women-in-power/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Women in Power: Female Leadership." October 11, 2018. https://ivypanda.com/essays/women-in-power/.