CHARACTERISTICS RELATED TO FEMALE MALE LEADERS …

[Pages:32]1

CHARACTERISTICS RELATED TO FEMALE & MALE LEADERS

Agnes M. Richardson May 2004

2

Abstract The following research investigated gender and the leadership role and determined if there are differences in leadership styles, behaviors, traits, and characteristics between female leaders and male leaders. Literature suggests there are specific gender leadership differences between males and females in leadership styles, behaviors, traits, and characteristics. This qualitative study assessed 2 male and 4 female faculty members with face-to-face interviews. Results indicated distinctions between male and female leaders in leadership differences. The distinctions did not, however, support the notion that female leaders are less competent than male leaders.

Introduction and Background Women are now found in leadership roles, as opposed to management roles, and it is unclear whether their leadership styles differ from those of male leaders or what the consequences of these styles might be. One of the most dramatic changes of the last few decades has been the movement of women into the American labor force. In 1950, only 33.7% of women participated in the labor force; however, by 1985 54.5% of women participated in the American labor force (Rix, 1998). Further, Parilla (1993) predicted that women would constitute 64% of all new labor force entrants by the year 2000. Adler and Izraeli (1994) stated that women have always played a major role in educational administration. However, Adler and Izraeli (1994) noted that this participation in educational administration has occurred more at primary and secondary levels than at college and university levels. They identified 56.9% of educational administrators as female when all levels of public education were grouped together, noting that the emergence of a female secondary school principal was one major outcome of affirmative action. Similarly, Desjardins (1989) noted greater visibility of women within primary and secondary education leadership positions. Desjardins (1989) found that approximately 70% of all elementary school

3

administrators and faculty members are female. In addition, Desjardins (1989) also noted that approximately 60% of all high school faculty members and 40% of all high school administrators are female. Boatright and Forrest (2000) questioned whether specific genderrelated differences in leadership style, behaviors, traits, and characteristics have emerged as a result of females rising to positions of importance in organizational hierarchies.

Eaton (1984) stated that more women were needed for leadership roles in two-year community colleges and four-year colleges. He identified only 50 female presidents in two-year community college settings. Further, only 5 females were identified among the 33-member board of the American Association of Community and Junior Colleges, and only 10 females were identified among the 25-member board of the Association of Community Colleges Trustees. During this same period, Eaton identified approximately 92,000 female and 142,000 male faculty members in community college settings. As a result, Eaton argued that it was important to insure proportional representation of women and other minorities within leadership, and decision making ranks. He argued that proportional representation of women and other minorities within critical leadership positions might increase opportunities for two-year and fouryear institutions to meet the changing needs of increasingly diverse student bodies.

Vier (1993) agreed, adding that female leaders were underrepresented in four-year college and university settings as well. Vier also noted that a majority of women who obtained the presidential level in higher education tended to do so more often in two-year community college settings. Desjardins's (1989) analysis regarding community college and four-year college presidents revealed that the two-year community college setting had become an ideal arena for the training and empowerment of women as leaders in higher education. Eaton identified similar findings, noting that community colleges tended to serve female and minority student populations predominately, and more often than four-year college and university

4

settings. Thus, it appeared that two-year community college settings afforded greater opportunities and support for female leadership development than four-year colleges. Further, it appeared that two-year community college settings embraced, encouraged and fostered diversity among the student body, faculty and administrators more than four-year colleges and university settings. As a result, Eaton concluded that the two-year community college environment accounted for the presence of greater numbers of women in key leadership positions.

In contrast, women have achieved small noteworthy advances in leadership positions within four-year college and university settings since 1984. For example, Vaughn (1989) identified 72 female presidents in two-year college settings and 32 female presidents in four-year college settings in 1984. By 1992, there were 106 and 58 female presidents respectively in twoyear and four-year college settings (Chliwniak 1997). According to Vaughn (1989), a major barrier to females assuming leadership roles in higher education settings is a lack of training and mentoring opportunities. Vaughn (1989) noted that many female presidents in higher education during the 1980's were participants at the National Institute for Leadership Development (NILD). Thus, it was hypothesized that the NILD was a critical entity for increasing numbers of females in leadership roles within higher education settings during the 1990's. For example, of the approximate 2,300 female participants in the NILD program during the late 1980's and early 1990's, 500 had advanced to vice-president and dean levels within their respective institutional settings while another 52 participants had ascended to presidential levels (Robertson & Tang, 1995). Still, other NILD female participants had gone on to become finalists for presidential vacancies within higher education settings outside of their respective institutional settings. Consequently, a gender change in leadership has continued to evolve during the decade of the 1990's from a predominate male one to one in which increasing numbers of females now occupy leadership positions within higher education settings.

5

According to Luthans (1998), theorists have made many attempts to define leadership, consequently current theorists have "narrowed their focus" to distinguishing the differences between a manager and a leader (p. 379). Bennis (1994) stated that there are many definitions of leadership, but leadership differs from managing. A manager administers, maintains, focuses on systems, and controls. A leader innovates, develops, focuses on people, inspires trust, and views the horizon. Weiss (2000) identified key leadership styles, behaviors, traits and characteristics of effective leaders. These key leadership styles, behaviors, traits, and characteristics included diplomacy, democracy, energy, idea generation, responsiveness to others, ability to command, and credibility. It was acknowledged that effective leadership styles, behaviors, traits, and characteristics varied significantly across contingencies and situations that were unique to particular settings. However, Weiss argued that: 1) being a manager did not guarantee that one was a leader, 2) effective leaders possessed capacities to influence others' performances in ways that managers did not, and 3) leadership was a position granted by subordinates while management was a role in which the individual was appointed.

Weiss (2000) further compared and contrasted the leadership styles, behaviors, traits and characteristics of leaders and managers, and found that managers accepted responsibility while leaders sought responsibility. In addition, Weiss found that managers demanded respect while following institutional objectives, and leaders gained respect by adding to institutional objectives. It was found that leaders functioned effectively within and across levels of decisionmaking. Functioning across levels of decision making included identification of existing problems, identification of alternative solutions, selection of better and best alternatives, implementation of agreed-upon alternatives, and collection of group and other related feedback. As a result, Weiss (2000) contended that leaders possessed and exhibited strategies that assisted others to achieve personal goals within institutional settings. Thus, managers were not

6

necessarily leaders who were legitimized and supported by others, especially subordinates. Attributes of leaders influenced how institutional visions and goals were developed and achieved.

Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt (2001) reported that the question regarding differences between men and women in leadership roles remain unanswered. The authors also stated that studies of these differences tend to revolve around differences in leadership styles. Findings of a meta-analysis of studies with comparisons of leadership styles of men and women, showed that women were more inter-personally-oriented or democratic compared to men, and men were more task-oriented or autocratic than women, thus supporting the theory that differences were stereotypic. Data from a sample of managers (2,874 women and 6,126 men) showed that female leaders scored higher on inter-personally-oriented leadership styles and utilized certain taskoriented aspects such as contingent reward and active management by exception. Burke and Collins (2001) found similar findings with regard to self-reported leadership styles of female accountants, compared to male accountants; females were more likely to use interactive styles.

The stereotype of males as leaders has only functioned as a formidable barrier for females who aspire to achieve leadership positions (Oakley, 2000). The association of predominately masculine attributes within the leadership role has placed women at a disadvantage. Closely associated masculine attributes to the leadership role include dominance, autonomy, decisiveness, stability, and prowess (Muff 1982). Oakley (2000) argued that the symbolic function of the leader was of special significance to institutional productivity, goal attainment, and survivability regardless of assigned title, and areas or settings of functioning.

For these reasons, Oakley (2000) contended that questions emerged regarding females' capacities for functioning in leadership roles. Both Dobbins and Platz (1986) and Powell (1993) found that female leaders were perceived as less capable than their male counterparts. Similarly,

7

Griffin (1992) and Offerman and Beil (1992) found that females in leadership roles were perceived as exhibiting opposite leadership styles, behaviors, traits, and characteristics when compared to their male counterparts on competence-related traits. Oakley (2000) found that stereotypes continue to portray women as less capable leaders than men despite studies which found few significant differences in the innate abilities of male and female leaders.

Moreover, early studies by Chapman (1975) and Carpeno (1976) indicated that many female leaders in business and educational settings held perceptions that females were less likely to possess and exhibit effective leadership styles, behaviors, traits, and characteristics than their male counterparts. This self-perception of being less than their male counterparts was supported in part by verbalizations regarding the virtue of the female "nature" and of "being females" in general (Carpeno, 1976). Further, Desjardins (1994) found that female leaders were challenged frequently to act in "masculine ways" in order to convince subordinates and others, such as governing boards and trustees, that they were as capable of effective leadership as their male counterparts. Interestingly, Powell (1993) found that gender stereotypes tended to disappear when subordinates became familiar with female leaders as individuals.

Still, other studies suggested that leaders influenced the environments of institutions significantly, regardless of gender. For example, Heller (1979) noted that leadership attributes influenced interpersonal behaviors and actions within institutions. Specifically, Harper (1991) found that leadership styles, behaviors, traits and characteristics influenced work roles, and how individuals related to one another as a result of these work roles. Heller (1979), Harper (1991), and Weiss (2000) concluded that leadership styles, behaviors, traits and characteristics were key elements in institutional success and failure.

Since findings are inconclusive, and tend to be based on self-reports of female and male leaders, additional insights regarding female leaders, based on other's reports, is needed.

8

Leadership styles, behaviors, and traits or characteristics for female leaders must be understood. This study explores the insight into how female leaders function, and how they are perceived by faculty members and employees in a university setting. Findings provide an understanding and a basis for the future study of hypothesized correlations between leadership efficacy and effectiveness, and gender. These findings also provide information regarding relationships between gender, leadership and institutional productivity, and goal achievement. Since the presence of women in leadership positions is a recent phenomenon, this study was needed to provide information related to female leadership efficacy and effectiveness in general.

Theoretical Frameworks Lewin (1951) presented the change theory and identified three stages to the change process. These stages were 1) unfreezing, 2) moving to a new level, and 3) refreezing. During stage one or unfreezing, individuals who perceived that change was indicated had to convince, motivate, and move others toward the desired change. If the movement of others toward change was successful, unfreezing began and participants exhibited a readiness to undertake the change, and move toward a different level. During stage two, participant's problem solved and generated solutions to accompanying problems of the belief that the change was good and in their best interest. In addition, behavioral changes emerged among participants, and individuals demonstrated a willingness to move beyond the current "status quo." Finally, as participants collaborated with others to develop plans of action regarding the change refreezing, or stage three, unfolded as participants demonstrated, integrated and incorporated accompanying new behaviors into a repertoire of functioning. During this time of refreezing, validation and reward of new behaviors and repertoire of functioning were crucial to the continuance of desired behaviors and completion of the change. As a result, validation and reward continued until demonstration and accompanying functioning occurred independently and automatically.

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download