Vikram Banerjee

Gender and leadership clearly is a huge topic and is a great topic of discussion and experts in the field have been getting their teeth stuck in to it for generations now, especially that of whether men and women have different natural leadership styles.

This article is part of a series by Vikram Banerjee on “Male vs Female Leadership” – click to subscribe to his articles.

My opinion is that the two aspects aren’t really a perfect fit. Leadership and Gender don’t ‘click into place’, but the beauty of the debate is that the join has to be held together by tape.

A debate on male and female leadership styles may well be productive if we knew how to have it in a productive way, but from what I have read, focusing on the differences between men and women seems to be a major factor in creating the very thing it is trying to destroy – the glass ceiling!

It can create an ‘us-vs-them’ mindset, and I have personally spoken to many professional coaches and leaders who inadvertently slip into this dangerous ground. What’s more it diverts us from more pressing, and interesting, questions with contemporary leadership.

In addition, as I said last week, there are so many variables at play that we can’t definitely say that there are any differences at all, and if there are any, why they exist. As gender roles and expectations evolve, it can be said that more and more women are operating in a stereotypically ‘male’ fashion. Likewise, more men are leading with styles that are stereotypically ‘female.’  Thus, theoretical generalizations about gender quickly collapse under practical scrutiny. Last but not least, at least among the leaders I have come across, neither gender particularly aspires to become more like the other, regardless of the large number of articles I came across about one gender can (and should) learn from the other.

The quest for greater effectiveness is what compels us to do the hard work of personal change. Hard-driving, demanding leaders of both genders work hard to show more compassion in their leadership style, not to become more ‘female’ in their style, but instead to get better!

In other words, greater effectiveness lies not in becoming more like a man or woman, but rather in achieving a better balance between assertiveness and empathy.

I find that focusing on the qualities themselves rather than on the gender of who supposedly brings those qualities is a much more accurate and useful frame for developing someone’s leadership style.

When we ask questions such as whether ‘men do this best’ and ‘women do that better’ I believe we are not looking in the right direction, let alone not being able to see the wood for all the trees; the core issue that gender and leadership discussions should raise is how leaders skillfully balance the forces of achievement and relatedness, so that our organizations are healthier and more successful with valued, motivated team members.

There is little reason to believe that either women or men make superior managers, or that women and men are different types of managers. Instead, there are likely to be excellent, average, and poor performers within each sex.

Keep updated – Subscribe to my articles

Everyone is individual in terms of where we stand in scale of democratic to autocratic leadership, and each style has it’s positives and weaknesses. Each style depends in part on upbringing, personal experiences of the different styles, societal context and work environment.  Our gender is one part of the picture, it does not define our leadership style and for businesses to get the best out of their whole workforce they need to identify and test qualities of effective leaders and avoid stereotypes.

Vikram Banerjee

As women increasingly enter leadership roles that traditionally were occupied mainly by men, the possibility that the leadership styles of women and men differ has begun to attract attention.

This article is part of a series by Vikram Banerjee on “Male vs Female Leadership” – click to subscribe to his articles.

However, the way women and men act as leaders doesn’t give the whole picture, as the individual’s leadership style is heavily influenced by the situational context and how others perceive it, not just gender.

Regardless, the debate over male and female leadership styles has been raging for many years now, and three distinct points of view have emerged over time, with no clear consensus:

1. No differences: Female leaders have values, needs and leadership styles similar to those of men who are leaders in similar fields.

2. Stereotypical differences:Female and male leaders differ in ways predicted by stereotypes, as a result of early social experiences that reinforce masculinity in males and femininity in females.

3.Non stereotypical differences: Female and male manager differ in ways opposite to stereotypes, because female managers feel they have to be exceptional to compensate for early experiences that are different from those of men.

A number of recent studies focusing on gender and leadership are all keen to stress the fact that if women are using a different style naturally, it is only a benefit for the organisation.

If women do adopt a different leadership style to men, what is a stereotypical ‘female style of leadership’?

 A recent study by the Harvard Business Review (HBR) said that women are more likely to adopt a more democratic leadership style. They encourage participation, share power and information, and attempt to enhance followers’ self-worth. Men, on the other hand, are more likely to use a directive command-and-control style. They rely on the formal authority of their position for their influence base.

Do women really have a different style of leadership?

However, there is an interesting qualification to these findings by the HBR. The tendency for female leaders to be more democratic than males declines when women are in male-dominated jobs. Apparently, group norms and masculine stereotypes of leaders override personal preferences so that women abandon their feminine styles in such jobs and act more autocratically.

It might be argued that a stereotypical female leader avoids difficult decisions and is not viewed as assertive or firm.  Margaret Thatcher is a perhaps the clearest example of a woman who demonstrated that this stereotype does not hold water.  Her nickname as the iron lady shows that her strength was not something associated with her gender and yet nor was it detached from her gender.  Those working for her recognised her firm resolve but also recognised that to demonstrate this she did not lose her femininity.

In doing some research for this article I have found a large number of articles, pieces of research and academic papers, all coming to very different conclusions. There really is no agreement amongst the academics and experts, therefore I think it’s fair enough for me to say I don’t have the answers! I can think of leaders in different situations, who fit into each of the three camps.

Keep updated – Subscribe to my articles

I think that’s the crux of the matter. There is simply so many external and uncontrollable variables, that surely any statistical analysis will struggle to find a firm foothold. Instead it comes down to opinion and views.

It’s a huge topic and we have only been allowed to scratch the surface so far. Next week I will try and bring it together somewhat and offer my opinions on what what we have discussed and of the debate as a whole.

Cameron Thomson

From Hashtags to retweets … and what we can all learn from the Porn Industry

We had a really exciting business mentoring session in Scotland last week.

Warren Cass, member of Footdown Cotswold Mentoring Group, came to join us and share his Social Media Marketing expertise.

Article by Scotland Business Mentoring group Leader Cameron Thomson

While Warren is far too modest to describe himself as a “guru”, his knowledge of Social Media is absolutely superb and he is a much sought after speaker on the subject.

The Scotland Business Mentoring group members all benefitted from learning how they can maximise their usage of various platforms such as Linked In, Twitter, You Tube, Facebook as well as capitalising on the investments they have made in their own websites.

In addition, Warren spoke about the value of  blogging and how we can build our personal presence in cyberspace.

The session was made all the more real and relevant by Warren providing a positive critique of members current use of these media and making suggestions as to how they can be improved.

All in all a great group mentoring session, great conversation, great guy.

Vikram Banerjee

While almost half of the UK workforce are women, they make up just 22% of senior management positions. This would indicate the continued existence of a glass ceiling which I referred to in my last article. Recent analysis from The Institute of Leadership & Management (ILM) agrees; with three quarters of women believing there is still a ‘glass ceiling’ , (interestingly less than 40% of men agree).

This article is part of a series by Vikram Banerjee on “Male vs Female Leadership” – click to subscribe to his articles.

So why does this glass ceiling exist?

The most commonly stated barriers for women are motherhood; childcare pressures in particular. My own mother decided to hit the pause button on a promising career to take care of my younger brother and I. These days over half of working mothers who have taken maternity leave agree that childcare is so expensive that financially it is not worth returning to work and 24% of working women with children under five spend more than a quarter of their salary on childcare.

42% of women take statutory maternity leave compared to only 9% of men taking paternity leave in their careers.  It is therefore hard to ignore that childcare and maternity related issues play a huge part in the progression of women.  However, these factors don’t affect all women and they are not enough to explain the small numbers of women in senior management.

ILM Report - Ambition and gender at work

The same report by the ILM claims that women feel a greater sense of risk around promotion, which leads to a more cautious approach to career opportunities.  When it comes to promotion and career progression, men are more willing to put themselves forward for roles where they don’t fully meet the criteria – 20% of men will apply if they only partially meet a job description, compared to just 14% of women.

This relatively lower confidence and more modest career ambitions would impede the progress of female managers into more senior positions. I believe these are fascinating and hugely important statistics in the battle against the glass ceiling. Employers need to recognise and respond to these difference, and discover ways to nurture ambition in women.

This could mean developing transparent talent management systems and introducing leadership career models and development approaches that flex to meet individuals’ differing needs. Coaching and mentoring, in particular, have an invaluable role to play here.

Is the ‘glass ceiling” becoming irrelevant?

These statistics could also be taken in a slightly different light and could be used to join the growing numbers of people who believe that the concept of the ‘glass ceiling’ is become irrelevant. Not because women are finally getting to get to the top of the biggest companies, which it seems is slowly happening, but because the glass ceiling is becoming irrelevant as the large majority of women who are coming into the workforce now can see what’s above that glass and they are simply not interested.

By definition a glass ceiling only exists if someone is below it, trying to break through it. These days the traditional model of corporate life is not the default ambition among younger workers -male or female.  In fact there is a broad disenchantment with the long hours and heavy commitment associated with corporate life and it is gaining force among young workers. Five years after earning an MBA, 40% of women are working from home. The disenchantment with corporate life is not limited to women: 80% of men aged 20 to 39 said that a flexible job takes a higher priority than doing challenging work or earning a high salary – this trend is growing: study after study shows that one of the defining traits of generation Y is that they are determined to not give up their personal life in order to get ahead at work.

People used to think that the revolution would happen above the glass ceiling, as more women pushed their way to the top. In fact, as people re-establish their priorities, the revolution may have already started, beginning to bubble below the glass ceiling.

Keep updated – Subscribe to my articles

One thing which is clear is that there is no inherent inability in women when it comes to holding senior leadership positions.  This may have been considered the case in the past but thankfully such sweeping stereotypes are no longer accepted by leadership theorists and the examples of excellent female leaders (e.g CEO Sisters, Women at the Top) that Miranda has been writing about show how wrong such views can be.

Given that there is no reason why women can’t lead, next week I will explore whether women do in fact lead in a different way to men and if so which, if any, style is better?

Mike Carter

Last week we continued our work with MBA Polymers and their new CEO Nigel Hunton, Bath Fifteen member. Nigel is using the Insight method and approach to help build a new team, gain alignment around the vision and values and identify and work on the key priorities.

Article by Head of Consulting, Dr Mike Carter.

MBA Polymers own an Footdown Insight licence which provides the MBA management team with a structured process to identify, and work on, the key organisational issues that will have the biggest impact on the company.

Insight Workshop

James Clark and I went to MBA Polymers in Austria to facilitate and get the team started with their first Insight team workshop.

The workshop was run in both German and English. James is fluent in German and despite the very good language skills of the participants his ability to clarify and add nuance to the meanings, combined with the dual language cards we developed, used with the Insight product, enabled the team to drill down into the finer details and made the whole process flow much better.

Mike Carter in action at the Insight Workshop

Mike Carter with MBA Polymers Team

This was the first occasion that this team had used Insight and the power of the tool shone through.  The feedback from the team was very positive; they enjoyed and appreciated the experience and the learning it gave them in such a short space of time.

Footdown Insight

In 2000 Footdown Founder Andrew Mercer set out on his journey to find a “manual” on how to lead and develop organisations. This led to what is now known as “Footdown Insight” and provides support to business leaders across the UK and beyond.

Footdown Insight

It’s the only leadership product that seeks to consolidate into a single template the best theoretical and practical advice available for leaders today. It is a comprehensive framework and set of tools that allows leaders of all types of organisations to work smarter by taking the guesswork out of identifying priorities for leadership action. It then provides rigorous and continuing support for tackling the problems that surface as a result. It also increases the value of individual coaching by providing a context within which to coach, ensuring that individuals’ objectives align with the goals of the organisation.

What’s Next

I am really looking forward to the next stage of the process. I will be going out to MBA Polymers in China to start the Insight process there, while Vikram and James will be joining the Austria team in early June to continue the work with the key tasks identified during the initial Insight workshop. As well as 1-to-1 coaching we will also be running sessions with the team using Insights Discovery Personal Profiling, which help leaders to develop their self-awareness as a leader, allowing them to maximize their strengths and identify areas of challenge.

Debbie Richardson

I am really excited to announce that we will be part of this year’s Great British Business Show in London.

The Great British Business Show is an exhibition designed to provide UK business owners with expert advice on how to grow, improve and expand their business.

Article by Debbie Richardson, Groups and Mentoring Director.

The event takes place at London’s ExCeL on the 17th and 18th of May and the show will host the UK’s biggest collection of businesses experts with seminars from Amazon, Saatchi and Saatchi, Google and James Caan.

Register for Free Tickets: www.greatbritishbusinessshow.co.uk

Footdown will be exhibiting and we are also running  A Live Board Room – which will be a fantastic opportunity for business leaders to share knowledge and experience.

Live Board Room Sessions

There are two separate Boardrooms each catering for two different audiences. The first will cater for aspiring entrepreneurs and is run by Footdown Member Warren Cass and the second will cater for businesses looking to grow and is run by Footdown.

We will be running 12 mentoring sessions for up to 84 leaders of SMEs in 40-50 minute sessions around their chosen issues.

Its a great opportunity for business leaders to experience the group mentoring model that our “Mentoring Groups” experience throughout the UK – where they are working together to be the best they can be in their respective business.

These sessions are facilitated by John Snell -  leader of the South West Fifteen Mentoring Group, Sam Elly - Consultancy Director and Vikram Banerjee - Insight Delivery Manager.

Register for the Sessions

For more information and to register in advance of the event and get a chance to join in this unique opportunity follow the link: Book a place in the board room.

Despite there being very few women in the Board Room, one lady who is certainly at the top of her game right now, is Denise Morrison, CEO of  Campbells.

The following comment made about her in The Economist article Bosses to Watch in 2012:

“the new boss of Campbell’s, Denise Morrison, will not persuade Chinese and Indian consumers to abandon home-made soup for canned stuff”

…made me want to know more about a woman who had made it to the top of a huge global brand.

First Women CEO of Campbell's - Denise Morrison

Denise Morrison Campbells CEO

In 2011 Denise Morrison Campbells became the first woman CEO of Campbells Soup and as well as this amazing achievement Denise has been recognised with many prestigious awards, including:

• “Woman of Distinction” American Heart Association of New Jersey, 2010.
• One of the 50 Most Influential Irish Women, Irish Voice 2010.
• “Top Woman in Grocery,” Progressive Grocer magazine, 2008, 2009, and 2010.
• One of the Top 50 Women to Watch, Wall Street Journal, 2007.
• Garden State “Woman of the Year” for Corporations, Garden State Women magazine, 2007.
• “Executive of the Year,” Snack Food & Bakery magazine, 2003.

Denise studied at Boston College for a degree in economics and psychology, graduating with magna cum laude, a rarely used distinction. She went on to start her career in the sales department at Procter & Gamble and then later joined Pepsi-Cola in Trade and Business Development. She then spent most of the 1980s at Nestle USA, where she held senior marketing and sales positions. In 1995, Denise moved to Nabisco Inc. She served as Senior Vice President and led the Nabisco Food Company’s sales organisation and was General Manager for the Down the Street division. She then went on to become Executive Vice President and General Manager of Kraft Foods’ Snacks and Confections divisions.

Denise joined Campbell in April 2003 as President-Global Sales and Chief Customer Officer in 2007 she was named Senior Vice President and President-North America Soup, Sauces and Beverages. Then in 2010 she was appointed Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer leading all of Campbell’s global businesses, corporate strategy, global advertising & design and research & development – impressive stuff!

I believe Denise has achieved her position of CEO at Campbells impart through dedication to one market sector, the grocery market. Denise has always worked inside this market sector, seeing her skills, knowledge and experience recognised through regular promotion within each organisation in which she has worked. Such dedication to one market has given Denise invaluable experience and helped propelled her to the top of her market sector.

The CEO Sisters

Researching Denise Morrison I found out very quickly, that not only is she one of the only women at the top in America but her sister, Mary Agnes Wilderotter,  is also CEO for Frontier Communications (#558) – now this was getting interesting.

Denise Morrison and Mary Wilderotter

Women at the Top in the USA

Women currently hold 3.4 % of Fortune 500 CEO roles and 3.6 % of Fortune 1000 roles – list published by Catalyst, this includes the CEO Sisters Denise Morrison and Mary Wilderotter:

Fortune 1-500 (17 CEOs)

• Meg Whitman, HP (#11)
• Virginia Rometty, IBM (#18)
• Patricia A. Woertz, Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM) (#39)
• Angela F. Braly, WellPoint, Inc. (#42)
• Indra K. Nooyi, PepsiCo, Inc. (#43)
• Irene B. Rosenfeld, Kraft Foods Inc. (#49)
• Ellen J. Kullman, DuPont (#84)
• Carol M. Meyrowitz, The TJX Companies, Inc. (#119)
• Ursula M. Burns, Xerox Corporation (#121)
• Laura Sen, BJ’s Wholesale Club (#221)
• Sheri S. McCoy, Avon Products Inc. (#226)
• Deanna M. Mulligan, Guardian (#245)
• Debra L. Reed, Sempra Energy (#274)
• Denise M. Morrison, Campbell Soup (#312)
• Gracia C. Martore, Gannett (#415)
• Beth E. Mooney, KeyCorp (#417)
• Heather Bresch, Mylan (#418)
• Fortune 501-1000 (19 CE

Fortune 501-1000 (19 CEOs)

• Ilene Gordon, Corn Products International (#502)
• Mary Agnes (Maggie) Wilderotter, Frontier Communications (#558)
• Karen W. Katz, The Neiman Marcus Group Inc. (#567)
• Laura J. Alber, Williams-Sonoma (#594)
• Kimberly Harris, Puget Sound Energy (#644)
• Mindy F. Grossman, HSN (#670)
• Amy Miles, Regal Entertainment (#691)
• Constance H. Lau, Hawaiian Electric Industries Inc. (#717)
• Diane M. Sullivan, Brown Shoe Company (#747)
• Tamara L. Lundgren, Schnitzer Steel Industries (#793)
• Cindy B. Taylor, Oil States International Inc. (#797)
• Linda A. Lang, Jack in the Box Inc. (#799)Helen McCluskey, Warnaco Inc. (#800)
• Patti S. Hart, International Game Technology (#878)
• Kay Krill, ANN Inc. (#883)
• Sara Mathew, Dun & Bradstreet Inc. (#980)
• Jane Elfers, The Children’s Place Retail Stores (#982)
• Patricia Vincent-Collawn, PNM Resources (#983)
• Judy R. McReynolds, Arkansas Best Corp. (#989)

In comparison, as of the 29th June 2011, there are 14 female CEO’s running FTSE 350 companies, of which 4 are FTSE 100 and 10 FTSE 250:

• Angela Jean Ahrendts-Couch, Burberry Group PLC
• Cynthia Blum Carroll, Anglo American PLC
• Alison J Cooper Imperial, Tobacco Group PLC
• Dame Marjorie Morris Scardino, Pearson PLC
• Lynn Rosanne Fordham, SVG Capital PLC
• Katherine Lucy Garrett-Cox, Alliance Trust PLC
• Doctor Harriet Green, Premier Farnell PLC
• The Hon. Diana (Dido) Mary Harding, Talktalk Telecom Group PLC
• Doctor Louise Makin, BTG PLC
• Carolyn Julia McCall, EasyJet PLC
• Ruby McGregor-Smith, Mitie Group PLC
• Heidi Mottram, Northumbrian Water Group PLC
• Kathryn (Kate) Elizabeth Swann, WH Smith PLC
• Dorothy Carrington Thompson, Drax Group PLC

Making it to the top against the odds

Against the odds these CEO Sisters have made it to the top in both the companies they work for – brains and ambition must run in the family.

In an interview together they talked about what lessons their parents taught them:

I would love to have been a fly on the wall as they were growing up, as from what I read their parents did a fantastic job in giving them the foundation they needed to become the CEO’s they are today.

The CEO Sisters are often interviewed together and asked about how their relationship has helped them in their career, they talk about the ability to get a different perspective on problems they may have, share contacts and network together.

Both women talk passionately about supporting women in the boardroom and the lessons they learnt from their parents which enabled them to be self confident and have the belief that anything was possible coupled with a focus that getting a good education would give them the freedom and flexibility to do anything they wanted.

One of the lessons they talked about was the “job jar” in which they could earn money from various chores. They could trade chores as long as the chores were done and even work together if they thought that was the best way to get the job done – the emphasis was that the family was a team working together. This struck a chord with me as I think it’s so important to learn the value of money early on. The way in which the CEO Sisters were taught was very clever, giving them more than just an understanding of the value of money, it also developed team working and negotiation skills from an early age, even if they weren’t aware at the time.

For two women from one family to be at the top of their chosen careers – is a rare thing, and the only example I can think of where I have seen this before is with the tennis playing Williams Sisters. I really believe that the lessons that the CEO Sisters learnt from a young age gave them the drive to learn and work hard. Their parents must be proud!

So what makes anyone stand out from the crowd and make it to the top like the CEO Sisters have – genetics, parenting, talent or luck? No one can take away from the CEO Sisters the hard work, dedication and sacrifices they must have made to get where they have today. I think coupled with a natural capability, their upbringing and the opportunities that life has then brought them has led them to where they are today.

Mike Roe

The “8 Core Beliefs” struck a cord with me. I think they play perfectly to those leaders who recognise that to accelerate performance you need to truly align and engage your people and teams, the core purpose of our product; Insight.  If nothing else they are a challenge to us personally as to how we currently lead in our organisations.

Thoughts from  Mike Roe, Footdown CEO.

 8 Core Beliefs of Extraordinary CEO’s

Geoffrey James interviewed some of the most successful CEOs in the world in order to discover their management secrets. He learned that the “best of the best” tend to share the following eight core beliefs:

1. Business is an ecosystem, not a battlefield.

Average bosses see business as a conflict between companies, departments and groups. They build huge armies of “troops” to order about, demonize competitors as “enemies,” and treat customers as “territory” to be conquered.

Extraordinary bosses see business as a symbiosis where the most diverse firm is most likely to survive and thrive. They naturally create teams that adapt easily to new markets and can quickly form partnerships with other companies, customers and even competitors.

2. A company is a community, not a machine.

Average bosses consider their company to be a machine with employees as cogs. They create rigid structures with rigid rules and then try to maintain control by “pulling levers” and “steering the ship.”

Extraordinary bosses see their company as a collection of individual hopes and dreams, all connected to a higher purpose. They inspire employees to dedicate themselves to the success of their peers and therefore to the community–and company–at large.

3. Management is service, not control.

Average bosses want employees to do exactly what they’re told. They’re hyper-aware of anything that smacks of insubordination and create environments where individual initiative is squelched by the “wait and see what the boss says” mentality.

Extraordinary bosses set a general direction and then commit themselves to obtaining the resources that their employees need to get the job done. They push decision making downward, allowing teams to form their own rules and intervening only in emergencies.

4. My employees are my peers, not my children.

Average bosses see employees as inferior, immature beings who simply can’t be trusted if not overseen by a patriarchal management. Employees take their cues from this attitude, expend energy on looking busy and covering their behinds.

Extraordinary bosses treat every employee as if he or she were the most important person in the firm. Excellence is expected everywhere, from the loading dock to the boardroom. As a result, employees at all levels take charge of their own destinies.

5. Motivation comes from vision, not from fear.

Average bosses see fear –  of getting fired, of ridicule, of loss of privilege –  as a crucial way to motivate people.  As a result, employees and managers alike become paralyzed and unable to make risky decisions.

Extraordinary bosses inspire people to see a better future and how they’ll be a part of it.  As a result, employees work harder because they believe in the organisation’s goals, truly enjoy what they’re doing and (of course) know they’ll share in the rewards.

6. Change equals growth, not pain.

Average bosses see change as both complicated and threatening, something to be endured only when a firm is in desperate shape. They subconsciously torpedo change … until it’s too late.

Extraordinary bosses see change as an inevitable part of life. While they don’t value change for its own sake, they know that success is only possible if employees and organization embrace new ideas and new ways of doing business.

7. Technology offers empowerment, not automation.

Average bosses adhere to the old IT-centric view that technology is primarily a way to strengthen management control and increase predictability. They install centralised computer systems that dehumanise and antagonise employees.

Extraordinary bosses see technology as a way to free human beings to be creative and to build better relationships. They adapt their back-office systems to the tools, like smartphones and tablets, that people actually want to use.

8. Work should be fun, not mere toil.

Average bosses buy into the notion that work is, at best, a necessary evil. They fully expect employees to resent having to work, and therefore tend to subconsciously define themselves as oppressors and their employees as victims. Everyone then behaves accordingly.

Extraordinary bosses see work as something that should be inherently enjoyable–and believe therefore that the most important job of manager is, as far as possible, to put people in jobs that can and will make them truly happy.

Vikram Banerjee

Reading Miranda’s fascinating articles regarding the female leaders who are an inspiration to her, has inspired me to pick up my pen (figuratively speaking of course!) and answer an earlier request to write about women.   More specifically, female leaders, the differences between male and female leadership styles and the notorious ‘glass ceiling’.

This article is part of a series by Vikram Banerjee on “Male vs Female Leadership” – click to subscribe to his articles.

More and more women are taking up top positions in business around the world, as well as in sport. Recently Miranda has talked about leaders such as Ginny Rometty, Anita Roddick and this year Lisa Pursehouse has become the first female chief executive in English cricket after being handed the role by Nottinghamshire.

Lisa Pursehouse

However the fact is, that even including these latest increases, in the business world, women currently make up only about 3% of the CEOs of publicly traded companies, and you could go across the various sectors and find much the same.  This hurdle which appears to prevent women reaching the top is described as the glass ceiling, women can go so far but no further.

Despite people’s best efforts, the glass ceiling still seems to exist.

There is some positive news on the horizon, Michelle Ryan and Alex Haslam of the University of Essex believe that women do now have a better chance of breaking through that ceiling, but with one caveat. The cracks in that glass ceiling only seem to appear when an organization is facing a crisis, thus finding themselves on what they have termed the “glass cliff.”

Michelle and Alex revealed a status quo bias. As long as a company headed by men performs well there’s no perceived need to change its pattern of male leadership. Only if male leaders have maneuvered an organization into trouble is a switch to a female leader preferred. What was strange was that the phenomenon does not seem to apply to organisations with a history of female leaders.

This suggests that as people become more used to seeing women at the highest levels of management, female leaders won’t just be selected primarily for risky turnarounds, but will get chances, such as the opportunity for Ginny Rometty or Lisa Pursehouse, to run organisations that have good odds of continued success, thus fading the glass ceiling out.

However this will be a slow process, and it could well be argued that a ‘glass cliff’ is simple re branding of the glass ceiling and won’t actually do much to solve the problem, as leadership history and common assumptions about gender and leadership will continue to contribute to the glass ceiling or cliff. This is a worrying view that is backed up by reports suggesting that the glass ceiling is going nowhere, such as in the report entitled Working Women (part of Friends Life’s Vision of Britain 2020 series). This believes that the glass ceiling will still be firmly in place at the end of this decade and the majority of females in work see no end to the obstacles hindering their progress.

There is also a popular, if underlying, belief that women are only seen as legitimate leaders in areas considered of direct concern to women,usually: health, education and welfare. Campaigners for this viewpoint would argue that women’s accomplishments in men’s fields tend to be invisible and so women rarely achieve the stature to be considered leaders in areas such as the sciences.

So what can be done?

A suggestion that has been discussed for a long time is that of a quota system, such as that used in Scandinavia. However a recent survey by the Institute of Leadership & Management (ILM) of almost 3,000 male and female managers found that there was a split view among female managers of using quotas, with only 47% in favour of using quotas. I personally am not a big fan of quotas, as while I can see the benefits of getting more females in leadership positions and so changing the viewpoint of others, I believe it actually masks over the issues at hand, sweeping them under the carpet without actually dealing with the root cause. This is a view also held by Penny de Valk, the ILM Chief Executive:

“The research reveals a real split in opinion on how best to deal with the glacial progress the UK is making  towards gender equality. Quotas may be seen as the quickest solution and some countries have introduced them with some success. However, they do not drive a commitment to the more fundamental changes that are required. The imposition of boardroom quotas here would be an admission of failure for leaders.”

Keep updated – Subscribe to my articles

The business world in the UK still remains very split on the subject of quotas and how best to deal with the problem of the glass ceiling. I don’t have the answer I’m afraid, but it is an interesting subject and I would like to listen to the advise of the leadership expert, Bernard Bass. After a recent analysis of female leaders, Bass concluded the following:

“This so-called “glass ceiling” is a sober reality. It alone should be enough to stimulate further research and interest in women and leadership.”

So that’s what I plan to do! Over the next few weeks, in a slight deviation from the norm, my focus will not so much be on sports but instead I will look into reasons as to why the glass ceiling may exist and any potential differences between leadership styles of men and women. Hope you enjoy them!