The alignment of the stereotypical characteristics of men and the stereotypical characteristics of good leaders makes it easier for men to be perceived as successful leaders, a phenomenon known as role congruity. In contrast, women are perceived as less fit for leadership because traditionally feminine characteristics are less consistent with our perceptions of successful leaders (Eagly & Karau, 2002). Women therefore face a double bind: When they conform to feminine stereotypes and behave communally, they are perceived as weak leaders. However when they conform to stereotypes of “good leaders” and behave confidently or aggressively, they are penalized for bucking gender norms. The good news is that the cultural concept of leadership is changing.
…show more content…
This escalation of men as leaders is not limited to the military and is well documented in businesses also (Gibson, 2005). For women in the military, this presents the potential for grim career prospects. The perceptions of one’s leadership potential and capability is directly tied to opportunities for advancement, including attendance of special training programs and assignments to positions of increased responsibility. Without these experiences, the potential for promotion is slim. Fortunately, the military has the unique characteristic of constantly utilizing leaders of differing experience levels. New Officers are commissioned daily and immediately assigned to lead men and women who typically possess much greater experience in all …show more content…
By analyzing the results of 99 different studies that measured leaders’ effectiveness from 1962 to 2011, the researchers were able to unpick the situations in which male or female leaders excelled. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the results suggested that the culture of the organization makes a difference: in traditionally male dominated, masculine organizations like government or the military, male leaders were more effective, while women triumphed in more ‘feminine’ environments like social services and education. What’s more, the results also highlighted that it matters who you ask. When leaders rated their own effectiveness, men tended to rate themselves higher than women. But when other people, such as their peers, bosses, subordinates or third party observers, did the rating, women were seen as significantly more effective than men. This was especially true taking into account the different levels of leadership: at lower, supervisor levels, men rated themselves higher than women, while women were seen by others to be more effective in mid- and upper-level positions (Bailey,
This escalation of men as leaders is not limited to the military and is well documented in businesses also (Gibson, 2005). For women in the military, this presents the potential for grim career prospects. The perceptions of one’s leadership potential and capability is directly tied to opportunities for advancement, including attendance of special training programs and assignments to positions of increased responsibility. Without these experiences, the potential for promotion is slim. Fortunately, the military has the unique characteristic of constantly utilizing leaders of differing experience levels. New Officers are commissioned daily and immediately assigned to lead men and women who typically possess much greater experience in all …show more content…
By analyzing the results of 99 different studies that measured leaders’ effectiveness from 1962 to 2011, the researchers were able to unpick the situations in which male or female leaders excelled. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the results suggested that the culture of the organization makes a difference: in traditionally male dominated, masculine organizations like government or the military, male leaders were more effective, while women triumphed in more ‘feminine’ environments like social services and education. What’s more, the results also highlighted that it matters who you ask. When leaders rated their own effectiveness, men tended to rate themselves higher than women. But when other people, such as their peers, bosses, subordinates or third party observers, did the rating, women were seen as significantly more effective than men. This was especially true taking into account the different levels of leadership: at lower, supervisor levels, men rated themselves higher than women, while women were seen by others to be more effective in mid- and upper-level positions (Bailey,