Women’s ways of leading: inappropriate essentialism or critical question?

Abstract

For decades, researchers have attempted to understand whether women lead in a way that is different from men and, if so, the nature of women’s style. The chapter reviews the methodological limitations in the evidence base, such as over-dependence on self-report and Anglocentrism, and suggests that the contradictory and unreliable nature of the evidence means that there can be no confident conclusion as to whether women lead differently from men. The chapter also questions why the evidence is overwhelmingly from schools and higher education, largely ignoring the two sectors, early years and technical/further/community education, in which half or more women are leaders in both the United Kingdom and elsewhere. It argues that an individual’s leadership is shaped by many factors at societal, organizational and individual levels and that leadership style is a complex and diverse construction. Interdisciplinary, intersectional and culturally sensitive examination positions gender as just one factor that may influence how an individual woman leads. The chapter goes on to suggest that the body of research is double-edged: on the one hand, the positive qualities and successes associated with the feminine are highlighted; on the other hand, the research acts to entrench further the existing structures of domination and potentially to exert pressure on women towards a particular repertoire of leadership.

More information

Identifiers

Catalogue record

Export record