Search results

The purpose of this paper is to further understanding concerning sex differences in leadership styles and to examine the mediating role of gender identity traits in these differences.

The paper draws on previous research that has established that many aspects of leadership style positively related to leaders' effectiveness are associated with the female gender role. Consistent with this assumption, the authors examined a sample of 157 Spanish managers whether significant sex differences favouring women emerge in relevant leadership dimensions (i.e. individualized consideration, contingent reward and emotional intelligence) and whether gender identity traits may help to explain such differences.

Results show that male leaders' lower scores in individualized consideration, positive contingent reward and emotional intelligence are partly explained by their lower identification with expressive traits. Furthermore, results indicate that integration of counter‐stereotypical traits into the self positively relates to effectiveness in the sense of use of a wider range of leadership styles for both women and men.

Future research could explore in more detail how sex differences in leadership styles are associated with gendered traits of identity in different countries, as well as whether a blend of masculine and feminine traits is predictive for a more multifaceted leadership style.

The findings are discussed in terms of how a gender perspective may help to better understand leadership effectiveness in contemporary organizations, especially in the case of male leaders.

The purpose of this paper is to examine stability and change in the linkage between gender and managerial stereotypes over a five-decade period.

Samples from two populations (n = 2347) described a “good manager” on an instrument that assessed masculinity and femininity during each of the past five decades.

Good-manager descriptions exhibited a decreasing emphasis on masculinity and increasing emphasis on femininity over time, culminating in an androgynous profile, or a balance of masculine and feminine traits, for each population in the most recently collected data.

Although women face systemic barriers in the managerial ranks of organizations, a change in managerial stereotypes to an androgynous rather than masculine profile would represent one less barrier for them to overcome.

If managers come to be held to an androgynous standard in their behavior regardless of their gender, there would be a more level playing field for candidates for open managerial positions, rather than one tilted in favor of men.

The analysis of data from samples of the same population types using the same measures systematically over five decades, and the provocative finding of an androgynous profile of a good manager in the most recently collected data, are original contributions to the literature.

While some women have emerged as leaders within contemporary organizations, they occupy one‐third of managerial and professorial positions in Canada while composing approximately one‐half of the workforce. At top managerial levels, they occupy less than 5 per cent of senior positions. Earlier research identified “female deficiencies” as a reason why few women have made it to the top. Other findings have indicated that following a masculine model has both advantages and disadvantages for aspiring women managers. Developmental differences between both sexes has helped to explain some of the problems for leaders and followers. Interactive leadership styles utilized by women have been beneficial in moving both genders towards a solution insofar as this style involves four factors: encouraging participation; sharing power and information; enhancing self‐worth of others and finally, energizing others. The use of an androgynous leadership model has not yielded significant findings but there are common characteristics of successful leaders combining both the masculine and feminine models. Organizations and their top leaders need to expand their definition of effective leadership so that an interactive style can be valued, allowing these organizations to be flexible in surviving within an increasingly competitive and diverse environment.

The aims of this study are threefold: to examine the relationship between gender role stereotypes and requisite managerial characteristics, to test Lord and Maher's recognition‐based processes to determine whether familiarity with women in leadership positions decreases the “think manager‐think male” stereotype and to examine the nature of the attributes used to describe men, women and managers.

Schein's Descriptive Index was used in this study. A total of 1,236 surveys were included in the study. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC, r¹) were computed to determine the relationship between the different moderators and requisite managerial characteristics. Factorial analysis and agglomerative hierarchal cluster analysis were used to identify the traits attributed to men, women and managers.

Male respondents continue to gender type the managerial role in favour of men. Both males and managers continue to be viewed as agentic in nature while women are viewed in more androgynous terms by both male and female respondents.

This study expands our understanding of how males and females view women, men and managers. Based on the results of this study, the authors would argue that women are better equipped to adopt an androgynous leadership style and to practise transformational leadership.

This study looks beyond ICC scores and looks at how each of the traits is linked to men, women and managers. The findings are discussed in terms of how organisations need to look beyond the misfit between women and requisite managerial characteristics and focus on what females can contribute at board level and to management in general.

The purpose of this paper is to examine perceptions of the “Ideal President” (IP) and presidential candidates in the 2016 US presidential election in relation to gender stereotypes and leader prototypes.

In all, 378 business students assessed perceptions of either the IP or a particular candidate on measures of masculinity and femininity. Androgyny (balance of masculinity and femininity) and hypermasculinity (extremely high masculinity) scores were calculated from these measures.

The IP was perceived as higher in masculinity than femininity, but less similar to the male (Donald Trump) than the female (Hillary Clinton) candidate. IP perceptions were more androgynous than in the 2008 US presidential election. Respondents’ political preferences were related to their IP perceptions on hypermasculinity, which in turn were consistent with perceptions of their preferred candidate.

Trump’s high hypermasculinity scores may explain why he won the electoral college vote, whereas Clinton’s being perceived as more similar to the IP, and IP perceptions’ becoming more androgynous over time, may explain why she won the popular vote.

The study extends the literature on the linkages between gender stereotypes and leader prototypes in two respects. Contrary to the general assumption of a shared leader prototype, it demonstrates the existence of different leader prototypes according to political preference. The hypermasculinity construct, which was introduced to interpret leader prototypes in light of Trump’s candidacy and election, represents a valuable addition to the literature with potentially greater explanatory power than masculinity in some situations.

The purpose of this study was to explore issues of gender and diversity raised by the 2020 US presidential election.

Samples from two populations (n = 667) described either an ideal president or one of the major-party candidates for president (Donald Trump and Joe Biden) or vice president (Mike Pence and Kamala Harris) on an instrument that assessed self-ascribed masculinity and femininity. Androgyny was calculated as the difference between masculinity and femininity; the closer the score to zero, the more androgynous the candidate.

The ideal president was viewed as androgynous (i.e. balanced in masculine and feminine traits) rather than masculine as in previous studies of presidential leadership. Compared to the White male candidates, Harris, a woman of color, displayed the most androgynous profile. The Democratic ticket represented a “balanced” team, with one candidate (Biden) higher on femininity and the other (Harris) higher on masculinity; in essence, an androgynous ticket. In contrast, the Republican ticket (Trump and Pence) represented a decidedly masculine ticket. Ideal president profiles differed according to respondents’ gender and preferred president.

The Democrats winning the election with an androgynous ticket suggests that a more level playing field for female vis-à-vis male candidates for political leader roles may be arriving.

The finding of an ideal president as androgynous rather than masculine is an original contribution to the literature on presidential leadership.

Literature and practice show that the integration of feminine characteristics into leadership in the management of hotel organizations is becoming increasingly important. Although some leading hotel chains claim to further this integration by encouraging women to develop their career paths upwards into the higher management ranks, little research has been conducted into this phenomenon. This is why this study seeks to assess and elaborate the current status of attempts to integrate feminine aspects into leadership within the hotel industry. The qualitative study held among hotel managers demonstrates that the terms ‘masculine’ and ‘feminine’ are confusing. Additionally, when feminine and masculine leadership are considered, these terms are not carefully implemented. Hence, there is a strong need for greater in-depth knowledge and effective training to enhance the successful implementation of feminine and masculine leadership in the hotel industry.

This paper aims to answer whether the notion of the gender and leadership stereotypes theory has already reached its boundaries.

To accomplish such a goal, it relies on the extant literature looking for more robust findings, problems, disruptions and pathways toward building a better understanding of this problematic.

The evidence gleaned throughout this paper suggests that the interplay between gender and leadership stereotypes theory has reached its boundaries. Moreover, the traditional sex stereotype or gender traits approach within companies seems to be highly limited taking into account that it tends to nurture rivalry and prejudice among people of different genders. Rather than focusing on leader sex approach or egalitarian quotas, in terms of leadership role and despite the fair argument of diversity, the author proposes that it is wiser to concentrate on a meritocratic view.

It suggests that an androgyny leadership style appears to be welcomed in organizations, yet some shift about this understanding may be occurring. At present, however, female aspirants of leadership roles should work increasingly toward adapting themselves to this profile. In doing so, it is likely that they may be benefited from organizational evaluations in which the merit issue constitutes an imperative.

Overall, it is expected to contribute to theory by arguing that the traditional understanding of gender and leadership stereotypes theory is not suitable anymore to deal with the uncertainties and complexities that shape today’s business arenas. On the contrary, it argues that such approach tends only to encourage gender bias and to nurture a somewhat sex war game in detriment of organizations efficiency and productivity.

The purpose of this article was to examine the following three questions: Are women’s leadership styles truly different from men’s? Are these styles less likely to be effective? Is the determination of women’s effectiveness as a leaders fact‐based or a perception that has become a reality? Conclusions revealed: Question one: Yes, women’s leadership style is, at this point, different from men’s but men can learn from and adopt “women’s” style and use it effectively as well. In other words, effective leadership is not the exclusive domain of either gender and both can learn from the other. Question two: No, women’s styles are not at all likely to be less effective; in fact, they are more effective within the context of team‐based, consensually driven organizational structures that are more prevalent in today’s world. Question three: The assessment that a woman’s leadership style is less effective than a man’s is not fact‐based but rather driven, by socialization, to a perception that certainly persists. The inescapable reality is that, within the senior ranks of corporate north America (and elsewhere), women remain conspicuous by their absence.

Notes that previous researchers have investigated the relationship between gender role (i.e. sex‐role identity) and leadership style, and they also have investigated the relationship between decision style and leadership style. However, points out that they have not investigated the relationship between gender role and decision style. Using three validated questionnaires with 90 participants, attempts to test the relationship between gender role, decision style and leadership style. Reveals, from the results, strong support for the proposed relationships: masculinity/directive/analytical/task‐oriented styles and femininity/conceptual/behavioural/relations‐oriented styles. Provides implications/application questions for practitioners, for example that “linking the people with the strategic needs of the business” (i.e. strategic human resource management emphasizing competence acquisition, development and utilization) requires an in‐depth analysis for many organizations. Suggests that instead of relying on a single measure, a combination of different measures may result in higher reliability and predictability. Concludes that the development of effective human resources training and management programmes requires further exploration of the relationship between gender role, decision style and leadership style.