Many hardworking women strongly believe that they can do anything a man can, and even better. This belief challenges the commonly held perception that male managers are more effective and successful than their female counterparts. Women worldwide have demonstrated their excellence in areas where men have not succeeded.
The ongoing discussion in society regarding the stronger sex has been a subject of debate for centuries within Christendom. The teachings of the early church, as documented in Apostle Paul’s first letter to Timothy, support women learning quietly and submitting to authority. In 1 Timothy 2:11-12a (NLT), Paul explicitly states that women should not teach or have authority over men but must listen quietly. Contradicting and reinforcing these teachings, St Peter suggests that husbands should honor and understand their wives as they coexist.
Despite being physically weaker than men according to the Bible, women are considered equal partners in the gift of new life from God. It is crucial for men to show respect towards women in order to maintain the effectiveness of their prayers. Furthermore, while biological arguments suggest that men have superior physical abilities due to their anatomy, studies indicate that male fetuses face a higher likelihood of complications during pregnancy, increased risk of premature birth, and heightened susceptibility to infection and illness in adulthood (Glezerman, 2009).
This paper seeks to evaluate the claim that men are better managers than women by critically reviewing gender differences in management. The persistent argument in management and professional life is rooted in the assumption that women are less interested or effective in leadership and managerial roles. By analyzing existing research literature, this paper aims to establish whether there is adequate evidence to substantiate the belief that women are inferior managers compared to men.
Many women have held prominent leadership roles, contrary to popular belief. Over 50 women have served as country presidents or prime ministers since the 1950s (Adler, 2001). The participation of women in management has been impacted by various complex factors, including social, religious, cultural, political, and economic influences present in promotion and evaluation procedures (Harris, 2004). According to data from the ILO (2004), there has been a steady rise in the number of women joining the workforce over the past five decades.
Although women show interest in joining male-dominated professions, their representation decreases as they advance in managerial hierarchies across all countries (Powell & Graves, 2003). The labor market remains highly segregated by gender, with female-dominated occupations consistently undervalued (Jacobs, 1999). Women’s economic position at work significantly lags behind men’s as they receive lower pay compared to men in the same occupation or even the same job (Roos & Gatta, 1999).
The term “glass wall” or “glass ceiling” refers to the challenges that hinder women’s career progression. The glass ceiling represents the barrier preventing women from attaining managerial positions, while the glass wall signifies their struggle to enter traditionally male-dominated roles. These barriers are perceived as invisible and challenging to overcome. Critics contend that women have not had sufficient time to acquire senior positions and emphasize the availability of qualified male candidates (Powell, 1999).
Studies have demonstrated that women face career challenges at an earlier stage compared to men (Broderick & Milkovich, 1991). Therefore, it is imperative to investigate the factors that affect women throughout different stages of their careers. Despite a growing number of women choosing non-traditional fields, their initial career decisions and prospects are heavily influenced by various socio-cultural and environmental factors.
Children often acquire sex role stereotypes from their parents, teachers, and the media during their formative years. In early childhood, parents play a crucial role in socializing children by transmitting and reinforcing behaviors that align with appropriate sex role stereotypes. According to Eagley’s social-role theory (1987), boys are encouraged to develop agentic qualities like ambition, control, dominance, and independence. Conversely, girls are encouraged to embrace communal beliefs and behaviors such as gentleness, interpersonal sensitivity, and emotional expressiveness.
Parents reinforce gender stereotypes, shaping their children’s interests and abilities. This fosters a household environment that highlights the distinctions between boys and girls. Simultaneously, teachers unknowingly favor boys with more attention, whether positive or negative, compared to girls. Such treatment subtly implies that boys warrant greater attention as a collective, potentially harming girls’ self-esteem.
Gender inequality is present in certain traditional African societies, where there is a preference for male children over female children. Consequently, girls often face discrimination when it comes to academic opportunities. This can have negative impacts on their self-confidence and influence the decisions they make regarding their choice of courses, fields of study, and ultimately their job prospects (Eze, 2004). Findings from research conducted by Dwyer et al (1997) indicate that gifted female high school students tend to avoid advanced mathematics and science subjects. Furthermore, they display a reduced interest in pursuing careers in science or mathematics compared to their male peers.
Research shows that there is a gender disparity in the choice of science or mathematics majors and career paths. This is evident not only in educational settings but also in the portrayal of female characters in television and mass media. Male figures are often depicted as powerful individuals, appearing frequently in TV commercials and advertisements for outdoor products like cars. On the other hand, women are often objectified and used to promote indoor products such as home remedies and cleaning products (Bartsch et al, 2000).
The portrayal of women and men in the media perpetuates traditional gender stereotypes, shaping people’s perception of reality. Ragins & Sundstrom (1989) suggest that societal gender roles learned from a young age can impact women’s career choices, directing them towards jobs traditionally associated with their gender and restricting opportunities for advancement. However, proving that early socialization is solely responsible for gender disparities in career aspirations is challenging. It is presumed that men and women have distinct decision-making processes regarding employment due to potential differences in how they respond to organizations and job prospects influenced by gender stereotypes.
Research shows that HR practices affect the attractiveness of job opportunities for both genders. Women are particularly drawn to organizations with diversity policies and work-family initiatives (Bertz et al, 1997). Moreover, women have a greater preference for jobs that align with feminine stereotypes and offer opportunities for positive relationships (Konrad et al, 1998).
Herzberg et al (1957) discovered that women prioritize intrinsic and extrinsic attributes that improve personal satisfaction and enhance interpersonal relationships in the workplace. In contrast, men value intrinsic and extrinsic attributes linked to autonomy, power, prestige, and financial gain. According to Eagly (1987), this divergence can be attributed to gender socialization where men are perceived as possessing qualities necessary for male-dominated professions while women are expected to possess attributes suitable for female-dominated roles. Additionally, succeeding in occupations predominantly occupied by men often requires having masculine physical characteristics and personality traits.
The belief that women must have masculine qualities to succeed in male-dominated jobs may deter female job seekers, leading them to think they cannot thrive in these fields and choose different employment options. This contributes to the gender gap in the workforce. While it is often believed that occupational segregation pushes women towards industries with more female presence, statistics reveal that women are not sufficiently represented in high-level management positions within these sectors (ILO, 2004).
The question at hand is whether women encounter more hindrances than men in moving up the ladder within organizations, and if they possess lesser ability or desire to do so. Gender socialization is proposed as a factor influencing aspirations for top management positions, with men being more inclined than women due to gender socialization. In a study conducted by Vinkenburg et al (2000) on managerial motivation differences between genders, it was discovered that women generally exhibit greater fear of success and competitiveness when compared to men.
Contradicting the notion of split loyalties between career and family, it was found that female managers prioritize their careers over family. Moreover, there were no differences observed in the needs for power and achievement among men and women in management. In a study on managerial commitment conducted by Singh & Vinnicombe (2000), gender differences were discovered in the nature of commitment at work. Men focused on being proactive, business aware, and ready to face challenges and complete tasks, while women emphasized good citizenship behaviors.
According to the text, it can be argued that women’s citizenship behaviours are less visible to managers compared to men’s task delivery and business awareness, which benefit both themselves and the organization. These behaviors earn men more recognition and opportunities for promotion to senior management positions. The dominance of men in management has resulted in career patterns that prioritize the experiences of men, rather than considering the experiences of women. Career progression is seen as a continuous upward movement through a series of related jobs over time (White, 1995).
The significance of maintaining a continuous full-time job for achieving success in one’s career is widely acknowledged. Nevertheless, women frequently encounter challenges resulting from career interruptions due to pregnancy and family obligations. Specifically, in industries such as aviation where pilots’ career advancements rely on their flying hours, the International Civil Aviation Organisation recommends that women take a minimum of 3 years of maternity leave for each child they decide to have. This places them at a considerable disadvantage compared to men in terms of upward career progression.
The dilemma faced by young women today is the decision between starting a family and maintaining their careers. This often leads to difficulties in family life, as well as separation and divorce for successful career women. The 2005 Divorce Statistics collection confirms this trend. Furthermore, various authors such as Adler (1987), Marshal (1984), and Harris (2004) have highlighted gender disparities in management approaches.
It is commonly believed that women possess stronger intuitive, interpersonal, and cooperative skills than men. These skills are crucial for an interactive leadership style that promotes participation and information sharing in the modern business world (Rosener, 1990). However, Schein’s (1975) research suggests that both men and women perceive men as possessing qualities linked to leadership and management.
Due to gender stereotypes and the imbalance in the number of men and women in managerial positions, these positions might seem to demand personal qualities that are generally associated with men rather than women. Additionally, Vinnicomb & Singh (2002) studied the influence of sex role stereotypes on perceptions of effective managers and found that women viewed themselves as more feminine or having a mix of masculine and feminine characteristics. However, they believed that successful senior managers had notably greater masculine traits than they did.
Based on the results, it can be contended that women who aspire to senior management face a disadvantage due to masculine managerial stereotypes. This discrepancy between the leader role and their gender role forces them to manage incongruity. As a result, women who do not perceive themselves as fitting the stereotype of good managers may choose not to pursue managerial careers and may not develop management skills.
According to several authors, the Leader Member Exchange Model suggests that inadequate relationships between female subordinates and male superiors, as well as homosociability and informal social networks, may benefit men and hinder women’s opportunities for top management or leadership roles (Harris, 2004; Powell & Graves, 2003; Verma & Stroh, 2001). Additionally, when women do secure management positions, they face additional obstacles during performance evaluation.
In a meta-analysis conducted by Eagly et al (1992), it was discovered that female managers generally received less favorable evaluations compared to males. This difference was particularly prominent when female managers displayed leadership styles that aligned with stereotypical masculine traits, worked in fields dominated by males, and were evaluated by male individuals. The reasons behind this discrepancy may be linked to the intensely competitive environment of the contemporary business world and the departure from the notion of lifelong job stability, which necessitates political aptitude for managerial achievement.
The influence of politics and power in the workplace can differ based on individuals’ motivations. Nevertheless, it is believed that societal norms and gender roles may result in women having unique political perspectives and values. This perspective highlights the compassionate nature and feminine values that women contribute to politics, which contrasts with the cutthroat political strategies typically connected to men in organizational settings. Such an approach is considered crucial for successful management (Martinez, 2008; UN, 2005). Studies on leadership behavior have identified various leadership styles frequently linked to gender stereotypes.
Both the feminine stereotype and the democratic leadership style, which emphasizes participation, as well as the impersonal leadership style, which focuses on individual welfare and morale, are connected. Likewise, the masculine stereotype is linked to both the authoritarian leadership style, which discourages participation, and the task-oriented leadership style that emphasizes initiating and organizing work activity. Some authors recommend a Gestalt approach to achieve effective management by combining different styles at different stages (Eagly, 1990; Powel & Graves, 2003).
There is a debate surrounding the preference of transformational leadership over transactional leadership in the modern business environment. Transformational leadership is often associated with the feminine stereotype, as it prioritizes the needs of others and values relationships. On the other hand, transactional leadership is more commonly associated with the masculine stereotype, as it focuses on clarifying responsibilities and taking action based on the performance of tasks.
Despite both stereotypes being seen as keys to effective leadership, leadership theorists argue against these notions (Bass et al 1996). Men may seemingly have an advantage due to the barriers faced by women in entering management and their struggle to connect with and utilize politics. This inquiry concludes that there is no clear evidence supporting the idea that female managers are either more or less effective than male managers.
The contemporary business environments highlight the need for feminine principles, which are more exhibited in women, to ensure successful management. Evidence disproves the notion that women are weaker managers than men. However, it does not prove that women managers are better than men. Therefore, we need to transcend the gender dichotomy and go back to the way it was in the beginning, as stated in Genesis 1:27 of the King James Version of the Bible: “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”
REFERENCES
Adler, N. (1987) ‘Women in Management Worldwide’, International Studies of Management and Organisations, 16, pp3-32.
Adler, N. (2001) ‘Women Joining Men as Global Leaders in the new economy’: In M. Gannon & K. Newman (Eds) The Blackwell handbook of cross-cultural management. Oxford, Blackwell.
Bartsch, R., Burnett, T., Diller, T., & Rankin-William, E. (2000) conducted a study on gender representation in television commercials and published it in the journal Sex Roles.
Bass, B., Avolio, B., & Atwater, L. (1996) researched the transformational and transactional leadership styles of men and women and published their findings in Applied Psychology: An International Review.
Bertz, R., Judge, T., Honeycutt, T., & Ronen, B. (1997) investigated how family-friendly human resources policies, salary level, and identity affect organizational attractiveness in the Journal of Vocational Behavior.
Broderick, R. and Milkovich, C. (1991) wrote a book called “Breaking the Glass Ceiling” at Cornell University’s ILR School.
The Divorce Statistics collection (2005) provides information on gender roles in divorce on their website.
Dwyer, C. & Johnson, L. (1997) explored the relationship between grades, accomplishment, and other factors in gender and fair assessment.
Eagly, A. (1987) published a book called “Sex Differences in Social Behavior: A Social Role Interpretation” in Hillsdale NJ.
Eagly, A. & Johnson, B. (1990) conducted a meta-analysis on gender and leadership style and published it in the journal Psychological Bulletin.
Eagly, A., Makhijani, M., & Klonsky, B. (1992) conducted a meta-analysis on gender and the evaluation of leaders and published it in Psychological Bulletin.
Eze, N. (2004) wrote a book on African Industrial and Organizational Psychology titled “Lagos.”
Glezerman, M. (2009) published an article titled “Men Are the ‘Weaker Sex,’ Says Birth Study” on the website Momlogic.Harris, G. (2004) ‘Women’s Role in International Management’, In A. Harzing & J. Van Ruysseveldt (Eds) International Human Resource Management. London, Sage
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Peterson, R & Capwell, D. (1957) ‘Job attitudes’, Review of research and opinion, Pittsburgh PA, Psychological Services.
International Civil Aviation Organisation [Online] (http://www.icao.int/Hyperdocs/display.cfm?V=2&name=C-WP%2F12996⟪=E
International Labour Office (2004) Breaking through the glass ceiling [online] http://www.ilo.org/dyn/gender/docs/RES/292/f267981337.accessed [20-June-2010]
Jacobs, J. (1999) ‘The sex segregation of occupations: Prospects for the 21st century’. In G. N. Powell (Ed) Handbook of gender and work. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage
Kling, K., Hyde, J., Showers, C., & Buswell, B. (1999) ‘Gender differences in self-esteem: A meta-analysis’. Psychological Bulletin, 125, pp 470-500
Konrad, A., Ritchie, J., Lieb, P. & Corrigall, E. (1998) ‘Men’s and woman’s definition of good jobs’. Work Occupations, 25, pp168-194
Martinez, M. (2008) Office Politics and power: women managers know how to use them wisely [Online] http://www.coaching-for-new-women-managers.com/politics-and-power.html [acccessed 20-June-2010]
Powell, G. & Graves, L. (2003) Women and Men in Management, 3rd ed, London Sage
Powell, G. (1999) ‘Reflection on the glass ceiling: Recent trends and future prospects’. In G. N. Powell (Ed) Handbook of gender and work. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage
N. Powell, Ed. Handbook of gender and work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ragins, B. & Sundstrom, E. (1989) “Gender and power in organisations.” Psychological Bulletin, 105, pp 51-88.
Roos, P. & Gatta, M. (1999) “The gender gap in earnings: Trends explanations and prospects.” In G. N. Powell, Ed. Handbook of gender and work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sadker, M. & Sadver, D. (1994) “Falling at fairness: How American schools cheat girls.” NY, Charlie Scribner’s Sons.
Singh, V & Vinnicombe, S. (2000) “What does “Commitment” Really mean? Vires of british and Sweedish engineering managers.” Personnel Review, 29(2), pp.
Vinkenburg, C., Jansen, P., & Koopman, P. (2000) “Feminine leadership- A review of gender differences in managerial effectiveness.” In M. Davidson & R Bruke (Eds) Women in management: current issues Vol.2, London: Sage.
White, B. (1995) “The career development and successful women.” Women in Management Review, 10(3), pp4-14.
Marshal, J. (1984) Women managers: Travellers in a Male World. London: Wiley.
Schein, V. (1975) “Relationship between Sex Role Stereotypes and Requisite Management characteristics among Female Managers.” Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(3), pp340-344.
Vinnicombe, S., Singh, V. (2002) “Sex role stereotyping and Requisites for successful top managers.” Women in Management Review, 17(3), pp120-130.
Verma, A &Stroh, L. (2001) discusses the impact of different perspectives on selection for international assignments on LMX and gender in their article titled “Different Perspectives n Selection foe international assignments: the impact on LMX and gender”, published in the Cross-Cultural Management Review, 8(3), pages 85-97.
The United Nations (2005) presents a document titled “Enhancing Participation of Women in Development through an Enabling Environment for Achieving Gender Equality and the Advancement of Women” [online], available at http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/egm/enabling-environment2005/docs/EGM-WPD-EE-2005-EP.12%20%20draft%20F.pdf.
