Women in leadership roles
(A blog of thoughts for my sister's paper...)
There are a couple of aspects to touch on: work/life balance, the increase is men's parenting role, macro versus micro thinking, and training.
Work/life balance: I think that work/life balance is one of the reasons why fewer women are in leadership roles. It's self-selecting. I think that we've reached a point in history where there are plenty of opportunities for females to take the lead, but that they see the lifestyle choices that those before them have made to attain "success", and choose to define it in other ways. The culture has not shifted enough though to recognize that opting out of 80 hour workweeks and blackberry tethering does not mean you're weak or unfit. Note Sheryl Sandberg's comment about leaving work at 5:30 in this article. I personally get very frustrated with the inefficiencies I see in 10-12 hour workdays and working weekends. I'm convinced that we could do things much leaner and just as (or more) effectively if people were forced to be as productive as possible for a short period of time. Instead tasks drag out and people don't learn their boundaries, which leads to them taking on too much and/or delivering sub-par product. Group cohesion suffers. Meetings are allowed to be unfocused and wander. People get caught up in perception not product.
On macro versus micro thinking: Women, I've noticed in my particularly male dominated field, tend to make more natural leaders and managers. They are less concerned with the personal recognition that goes along with it and more interested in creating and sustaining an excellent team. They seem to be particularly interested in providing the opportunities that they missed to others coming up behind them. They also seem to intuitively believe that providing these opportunities secures significant long term gains. This is not limited to women, I've seen male leaders that do the same, but percentage-wise it seems to be normal for female leaders and maybe 30% of the male leadership. Could this be that women in leadership roles are less common and the ones that make it to that level are the cream of the crop?
The increase in men's parenting role: The male leaders that I've seen that are fantastic role models tend to be ones that are highly involved in parenting their children (or were). The compassion and empathy needed for the home role translates very well into managing a team, setting boundaries, and nurturing potential. Since historically women have had this role and tend to be more empathetic, I believe that's another reason they make great leaders in corporate America when they choose to engage it.
On maternity leave: Maternity leave makes leadership during child-bearing years very difficult. If you are a solid contributor, you will have guilt about leaving for a few months to have a child, you'll have guilt as a mother about having guilt about work, and no matter how you slice it, somebody else has to pick up your slack. Even the most understanding coworkers will feel frustrated by losing a valuable leader during a critical time. I'm not sure that there is a solution to this, but it definitely impacts women in leadership roles if they want to have children. They are forced with putting off children till they've "made it", having children before seeking out the truly challenging roles, or accepting that they will likely always lag behind their peers who do not take chunks of time off. (I really noticed this first in the Naval Aviation community, which has very structured steps to progression and maternity leave really penalized you, but I've seen it in corporate America as well.)
And there are my thoughts on women and leadership. A bit scattered. :)
There are a couple of aspects to touch on: work/life balance, the increase is men's parenting role, macro versus micro thinking, and training.
Work/life balance: I think that work/life balance is one of the reasons why fewer women are in leadership roles. It's self-selecting. I think that we've reached a point in history where there are plenty of opportunities for females to take the lead, but that they see the lifestyle choices that those before them have made to attain "success", and choose to define it in other ways. The culture has not shifted enough though to recognize that opting out of 80 hour workweeks and blackberry tethering does not mean you're weak or unfit. Note Sheryl Sandberg's comment about leaving work at 5:30 in this article. I personally get very frustrated with the inefficiencies I see in 10-12 hour workdays and working weekends. I'm convinced that we could do things much leaner and just as (or more) effectively if people were forced to be as productive as possible for a short period of time. Instead tasks drag out and people don't learn their boundaries, which leads to them taking on too much and/or delivering sub-par product. Group cohesion suffers. Meetings are allowed to be unfocused and wander. People get caught up in perception not product.
On macro versus micro thinking: Women, I've noticed in my particularly male dominated field, tend to make more natural leaders and managers. They are less concerned with the personal recognition that goes along with it and more interested in creating and sustaining an excellent team. They seem to be particularly interested in providing the opportunities that they missed to others coming up behind them. They also seem to intuitively believe that providing these opportunities secures significant long term gains. This is not limited to women, I've seen male leaders that do the same, but percentage-wise it seems to be normal for female leaders and maybe 30% of the male leadership. Could this be that women in leadership roles are less common and the ones that make it to that level are the cream of the crop?
The increase in men's parenting role: The male leaders that I've seen that are fantastic role models tend to be ones that are highly involved in parenting their children (or were). The compassion and empathy needed for the home role translates very well into managing a team, setting boundaries, and nurturing potential. Since historically women have had this role and tend to be more empathetic, I believe that's another reason they make great leaders in corporate America when they choose to engage it.
On maternity leave: Maternity leave makes leadership during child-bearing years very difficult. If you are a solid contributor, you will have guilt about leaving for a few months to have a child, you'll have guilt as a mother about having guilt about work, and no matter how you slice it, somebody else has to pick up your slack. Even the most understanding coworkers will feel frustrated by losing a valuable leader during a critical time. I'm not sure that there is a solution to this, but it definitely impacts women in leadership roles if they want to have children. They are forced with putting off children till they've "made it", having children before seeking out the truly challenging roles, or accepting that they will likely always lag behind their peers who do not take chunks of time off. (I really noticed this first in the Naval Aviation community, which has very structured steps to progression and maternity leave really penalized you, but I've seen it in corporate America as well.)
And there are my thoughts on women and leadership. A bit scattered. :)
Comments
Post a Comment