Too Many Women Fall for Stereotypes Of Selves, Study Says
Three decades after droves of women started business careers, and at a time when 50.3% of all managers and professionals are female, women still comprise fewer than 2% of Fortune 1000 CEOs and just 7.9% of Fortune 500 top earners.
A familiar litany of reasons attempts to explain why that is: Women hit their prime childbearing years at the same time they are most pressured to prove themselves at work; they are reluctant to put in the 80-hour workweeks and globe-trotting required for a shot at the corner office; they are too concentrated in staff jobs like human resources or marketing, where they never learn crucial profit-and-loss responsibility; they don't have informal mentoring and networking opportunities, like golfing with the guys.
These theories belie the basic truth proved by countless surveys over the past decades: There is little difference between the leadership styles of successful male and female bosses.
The big problem is both sexes believe their own biased perceptions more than they believe this fact. The problem was pointed out in a new study by Catalyst, the New York research group, which found that women internalize many of the stereotypes men have about them as less-effective leaders.
Catalyst first analyzed more than 40 studies of men and women leaders, and found no real difference in styles. The group then asked 296 executives of both genders, 85% of whom were CEOs or within two reporting ranks of that post, to rate, by percentage, the effectiveness of female and male leaders on 10 different leadership behaviors. It avoided direct "who is better at" comparisons.
To their credit, men said both men and women were roughly equal when it came to team building, mentoring, consulting and networking. They gave women higher marks on two qualities: supporting and rewarding.
But in a disturbing find, men said they were superior to women at problem solving, inspiring, delegating and "influencing upward," or being able to have an impact on the people above you -- four critical leadership skills. And because men are typically the ones in charge at businesses, these opinions help explain why women are so thinly represented at the top.
When women do stand up to men who say women aren't equipped to be leaders, they can wield a lot of power. Last week, Neil French, world-wide creative director of WPP Group, resigned his job amid an uproar over remarks he was reported to have said about female ad executives. Earlier this month, Mr. French reportedly said at an industry dinner that there weren't many high-ranking female creative-advertising directors because "they're crap" and "don't deserve to make it to the top" because of the time they spend caring for children. Mr. French last week said his remarks were taken out of context, but that he had nevertheless decided to resign.
Yet Catalyst's study found that women are giving up important ground. Women said they are better at supporting and rewarding employees, and at the important tasks of problem solving, team building, mentoring, consulting and inspiring. But they also said men are better at networking, influencing upward and delegating.
"Women as well as men perceive women leaders as better at caretaker behaviors and men as better at take-charge behaviors," says Ilene Lang, president of Catalyst. "These are perceptions, not the reality."
But perceptions, we all know, strongly influence reality.
After Ms. Lang reported the study's results to Catalyst's advisory board, one member described how the big consulting company at which she is a partner discovered how sex-role stereotypes influence employee performance ratings. After analyzing past reviews of managers, the company found that women who aren't considered "supportive" mentors got negative ratings, while nonsupportive men weren't at all badly judged. "Men aren't expected to be supportive, so they're not criticized when they aren't," says Ms. Lang.
It's not surprising that women are rated as more effective leaders when they work in so-called feminine occupations, such as cosmetics or fashion companies, than when they are employed in a traditionally masculine industry such as steel. Respondents in Catalyst's study who had a female boss in a feminine occupation were likely to judge women as better problem solvers than men; but those with a female boss in a masculine occupation expressed profoundly negative views of women leaders. So, simply hiring more women into management positions isn't likely to eliminate stereotyping.
Catalyst advises companies to combat stereotyping by making sure men and women are judged equally on performance reviews, and educating managers about the often latent influence of stereotyping.
But women also have to push themselves and one another to stop believing they don't have what it takes to be great leaders, and to stand up to men who believe they don't.
As the women who stood up to Mr. French showed, speaking out is a powerful tool.
女性对自身领导才能存在认知误区
大量女性投身商界已有三十年时间了，而且，在经理人和专业人员的世界里，女性已超过半壁江山，人数比例达到了50.3%，但一个严峻的事实是，在《财富》杂志(Fortune)1000强企业的首席执行长中，女性还不到2%；在《财富》500富豪排行榜上，女性也只占7.9%。
之所以出现这种情况，一些老生常谈的原因似乎可以给出解释：当多数职业女性需要在事业上大显身手的时候却正值她们的最佳生育期；她们不愿意为获得一个可以拥有转角办公室的职位而过一种每周工作80小时、还要在世界各地飞来飞去的紧张而动荡的生活；她们大多安于人力资源或市场营销等事务性工作，在这些岗位上，她们很难体验到对企业盈亏殚精竭虑的重大责任感；还有，她们缺乏一些非正式的建立人际交流和沟通网络的机会，比如与同事或同行打打高尔夫球等。
上述这些理论掩盖著一个过去几十年已被无数调查证实了的基本事实，那就是：成功的男性或女性领导者在领导风格上并无明显差异。
最大的问题是，不论男性还是女性都置这一事实于不顾，而更愿意相信他们自己的偏见。这一点在纽约研究机构Catalyst最近完成的研究中表现得很明显，研究发现，女性自身无形中认同了男性认为他们欠缺领导才能的成见。
Catalyst首先分析了40份有关男性和女性领导者的研究资料，发现他们在管理风格上并无差异。该机构随后对296位男性和女性管理人士进行了调查，这些人士中有85%在公司担任首席执行长或比这一职位最多低两级的职位。调查要求他们对男性或女性领导者在10种不同领导行为上的表现给出评分（百分制）。调查没有采用类似“谁做得更好”这样的直接方式。
值得欣慰的是，男性被访者认为，在团队建设、监督指导、协商和人际关系方面，男、女领导者的表现大体相当。他们在“支持”和“奖励”两个方面对女性的打分比较高。
但另一方面，男性表示他们在解决问题、激励下属、分派工作和影响上级这四项关键的领导才能上要优于女性。并且，由于通常企业里的最高层负责人都是男性，因此，这些看法也可在一定程度上解释为什么女性在高级职位中的比例那么低。
但当女性勇敢地对那些声称她们不具备领导能力的男性表示抗议时， 她们是能发挥很大威力的。上周WPP Group的全球创意总监内尔?弗兰奇(Neil French)宣布辞职，据称原因是他发表的有关广告界女性管理角色的评论引起了轩然大波。据说本月早些时候弗兰奇在一个业界人士参加的宴会上说，广告界高级别女性创意总监屈指可数，原因是她们太“没用”，而且“她们不应该被提升到高级职位上”，因为他们要为照顾子女花大量时间。弗兰奇上周表示，他的话被人断章取义了，不过他还是决定辞职。
但与此同时，Catalyst的研究也发现，其实是职业女性自己放弃了重要岗位。女性受访者表示，她们在支持鼓励和奖励员工方面做得更好些，在解决问题、团队建设、指导下属、咨询和激励员工方面也是如此。但她们同时也表示，男性管理者在人际关系网建设、影响上级和分派工作方面要优于她们。
Catalyst的总裁Ilene Lang说，女性受访者和男性一样认为女性领导者在“照管性”工作方面更有优势，而男性领导者在担负责任方面更优越。但这些都只是观念上的，现实并非如此。
不过我们都知道，观念对现实有著极强的影响力。
在Lang向公司顾问委员会报告研究结果后，委员会的一位成员描述了这家大型咨询公司在人们有关性别角色的成见对评价员工职业表现的影响方面得出的结论。在分析了以往对管理者的调查意见之后，这家公司发现，那些被认为“支持性”不够的女性管理者得到了负面评价，而同样“支持性不够”的男性管理者却完全不会因此受到负面评价。Lang说，人们对男性管理者具有良好支持性没有什么期望，因此，即使他们在支持性方面很欠缺，他们也不会因此受到责备。
与传统上的男性化行业（如钢铁业）相比，在所谓女性色彩较浓的行业──比如化妆品行业或时装行业──任职的女性领导者能得到较高的评级，这一点并不让人意外。根据Catalyst的研究，那些在女性行业任职且上司也是女性的受访者可能会认为女性在解决问题方面优于男性。但在男性行业任职、上司是女性的受访者对女性领导者的评价则非常负面。因此看来，简单地在管理岗位上安排更多女性不可能消除成见。
Catalyst建议企业抛弃成见，确保根据业绩表现一视同仁地评价男性和女性管理者，并提醒管理者警惕传统成见潜移默化的影响。
但是，女性管理者也应该鞭策自己和他人，不要认为女性不具备成为杰出领导者所需要的素质，并勇敢地面对那些认为她们缺乏领导者素质的男性。
大声说出想法是一件很有力的武器，那些站出来对弗兰奇先生说不的女性已向我们证明了这一点。
