I’m going to presage my remarks, because I have reflected on this long and hard…by saying I consider myself to be a feminist and I have to say some of my best bosses have been women but I have to say my worst ones have been…Looking back, it’s to do with insecurity. It has been difficult for women to get on for whatever reason, so I think that when women get to a position of authority they almost feel threatened by other women and don’t actually support them in a way that would be helpful. I think because men feel it’s almost their natural right to be in those sorts of positions there’s no sense of insecurity at all and they’re more relaxed and sometimes can be a better boss because of that.

Not all men, but the sorts of men I’ve come across … are more directive; do have teams, yes, but…are far more aware of … unofficial power structures. Even if it’s not as obvious as a club, they have contacts, are clubbable in that sense, they build them up. I think women are less comfortable with doing it. A lot of them do have caring responsibilities so don’t have time to build those relationships outside work. Again, it’s that confidence. I don’t think I’ve had a male boss who’s not had some sort of confidence and self-assurance that he shouldn’t have been there.

Women probably are more corporate with a small ‘c’…It is about communicating, influencing, trying to manage sideways as well as down. And perhaps being a little more involving. I try and find good people whoever they are in the organisation rather than look for a title or a position first. And I think women probably respect talent rather than hierarchy and see the good…wherever it is, so I think they probably do manage in different ways and I do think that we are less ego driven.

In terms of getting things done, my experience is that women have a greater tendency towards collaboration in relationship with women…men have a tendency towards a more competitive approach to getting things done.

Typically, men seem to be incredibly single minded: all go on one thing, and then all go on the next, then stop and celebrate. Typically, women seem to be much better at seeing the longer-term needs ahead of time, planning, keeping things on track, ‘multitasking’, plus keeping people informed etc. [They are] also less adept at claiming credit for what has been achieved.

I think women judge themselves more harshly. If I say they perhaps have higher standards, I don’t mean to denigrate men, but they’re more aware of what they can’t do rather than being more positive about the things they can do.

I tend to believe that individual leaders have different styles. I think it’s what works for you. I’m thinking of a guy that got quite a lot of criticism in a company I worked in … Some of his team loved him and some hated him because he just didn’t care about them. But actually he’s hugely successful. The problem is that success is unlikely to be sustainable. He hadn’t got time for people that needed too much of his time. In his case, the problem is that the next layer down should be worrying about the people, because he’s not. And yet he’s a good leader. What he doesn’t do is make it clear what the expectation is of the layer below him. So I think it depends on you really.

I had a number of men who worked for me who were very much in touch with their feminine side and couldn’t criticise their teams. I mean critical in terms of improvement, potential and all that. I just know too many people who have got too many different leadership styles … Do women and men have different leadership styles? Yes, but … I know some women who treat their teams and wider teams as their ‘family’ and are all protective, not objective. But I’ve seen some women who are very similar to the men. (Jessica)

It’s interesting actually because I’ve only ever worked for two female bosses. The most recent one for about nine months and previous to that it was for about a year; so never for very long, which is interesting. One of them was probably more male than some of the males I’ve worked for…aggressive, dominant, not listening…She wasn’t from within the business; she’d come in from outside. Not really listening, not taking much input, much more what I would call old-style, command and control kind of orientations. Whereas my current boss is much more open, positive and thoughtful…I think the bosses who have been more input orientated in terms of listening and considered have been quite open about they don’t really understand this, are willing to learn, which obviously made me feel good as well in terms of being able to point them towards, or give my views, so I don’t know whether it’s a ploy or not. But just much more input orientated and listening rather than ‘I know all this and this is what I want you to do’. (Olivia)

I’m not sure whether it’s a gender issue or whether it’s an extrovert/introvert issue. So I think there is some truth in the fact that women are slightly more interactive with the human side of management in my experience. But I have equally worked with women who have had absolutely zero skills at the human side … I’m reasonably extrovert and I have been managed by highly introverted people, and that is quite difficult because it’s a very different way of drawing energy from working with people…for me that’s probably more important than gender.

There are quite a few women here who are really bad at delegating and others who are good, and of the few men we’ve got they don’t really fall in any particular categories…I hate this idea that women are more sort of touchy feely and collaborative. I just don’t see it. And I think it’s dangerously stereotypical and it reinforces the differences that I’m not sure are justified, so no, I don’t buy that one particularly. I know a lot of people do, but I can’t say I’ve spotted it…the few really successful women I know are the ones…who are very hatchet faced and very sort of motivated and tough and they simply don’t fall into any of these categories, that they’re good at collaborative working and good with people, they’re not – they’re real Mrs Thatcher type people. Now I come to think about it I know loads of the men who are extremely collaborative in the way that they work so, no, personally I’m not convinced.

Nobody is all man and all woman. I mean, we all have traits that cross over into the categories and so many factors that impact on that. How one’s own mother and father treated them, the role models that they had. But I definitely think…that some men lead as very patriarchal leadership, like you know they want everyone to just follow them because they’re the dad and I see that. I have some of those issues where I am now; I have the dad one, the dad leader. And of course I’m 20 years older than him so you know: ‘don’t do that’.

As a female you are encouraged to be polite and all of those kinds of behaviours around not showing off…deferring as well, and in a way it being inappropriate somehow to play up, so you play down what you’ve done, what you’ve achieved – you know ‘oh it was nothing, it was easy, anybody could’ve done that’. And not necessarily to seek praise in that kind of way; certainly not to describe what you’ve done in an overblown fashion, more to describe what you’ve done in an underplayed fashion.

I’d have been very bad at that: quite bad at getting cross, quite bad at wearing pin-striped suits, quite bad at loud voice, terrible at that thing about taking up space eating (slurp!) like that. I can’t do all those things; I can’t ask a very long question so I would’ve failed if I’d had to do it that way. I could only do it my way.

Decision-making

Decision-making was one area where there were perceived differences in approach by men and women, as suggested by Carrie:

Diane reinforced this view by stressing that, however communicative, consultative and involving a person was as a senior manager, ‘at the end of the day the consultation has to stop and you have to make a decision’.

Democracy versus dictatorship

Many of the women spoke about the need to work on a spectrum of leadership and decision-making that ranged from the dictatorial to the consensual, without ever ‘actually disregarding anybody’s contribution’ as Gill put it. Choosing the right approach for a given set of circumstances was seen as a major challenge. Jessica related how she had moved from a dictatorial to a democratic approach, and then back again in the light of feedback from her staff:

Andrea also spoke of the tension between what she described as the nurturing/facilitative approach versus the instructive/militaristic view, without attaching one or other approach to any particular gender, not least because men could be as cautious as women when it came to decision-making:

Some of the other participants in the study felt that at times they could be too trusting and not sufficiently directive in their approach to other staff, as for example Gill:

Gill also felt that there were times when it was difficult to be tough enough:

Ego

Many of the interviews raised the question of ego – not least in the difference between men and women. Fiona commented:

Whereas before that I think the models, not just in line management – strategic management – was so rooted in hierarchy and military management that the model … was a male one … The emergence of a greater understanding that there are different ways to manage people and there are different styles that are acceptable has been enormously empowering for men and women. However, my belief is only a minority of male managers operate in a way that has…more feminine values and only a minority of female managers operate in a way that has much male culture values. There is still a bias. But there are so many things that qualify that. Personally, I think I migrated. I’m quite sure my initial management style was pretty male because I learnt how to work that model…When I discovered I really liked running teams, I also discovered that it called on quite different qualities in me. I needed to understand how to give people space to perform to their best advantage; how to create a sense of vision which would invite people to develop themselves and their contribution to getting there. It would’ve been unknown to me in the early days. I thought I had to think everything through and direct, which is how I suppose I see male patterns. And I thought a totally competitive environment was fine. Now I think a cooperative environment is more stable long term. So in general terms I certainly think women’s greater ability on the whole to communicate more flexibly and without quite so much need to position themselves enables things. It’s a management style that some men find difficult and vice versa.

I believe that there is a greater tendency in men to be more competitive in their approach and for women to be more collaborative in their approach and build relationships to achieve goals which have a broader impact and perspective rather than just achieve targets. That I think is starting to change significantly and I actually think the skills that I and many of my colleagues bring; and male colleagues, I’m not saying they don’t have collaborative skills at all – I think there is a greater propensity to competition and that women have a greater tendency towards collaboration. I actually think the world in which we are moving into, and I do think an element of this is innate, some of it is learnt but the skills that female leaders bring now are in greater demand…there is a far greater recognition and appreciation of the skills that we bring, particularly around collaboration, particularly around nurturing and supporting people and building relationships with people are incredibly important and will become ever more important in an increasingly challenging public-sector environment.

It all depends on what your underlying type is in relation to how you then respond in stressful situations; whether you resort to ‘this is what you’ll do’ or actually whether you take an input. I do think that’s a style thing.

I do bring a multi-skill thing because I do the washing up and move the furniture, don’t I? Always have … I think I’m less role-defined: yes I’m [Chief Executive], yes I’m leader, I’m all that, but I’m very happy to do whatever it takes to make that work. And I think that irritates a lot of people. It puzzles a lot of people; it puzzles a lot of men.

As a woman in the organisation, it’s actually in some ways easier for me to influence it through my natural talents and my natural skills than it is for many of my male colleagues … Throughout my career I’ve been in the minority. I actually don’t think about it, but there will be occasions when I will be in a large group of people and I’m the only woman. Actually I don’t sit there thinking ‘I’m the only woman’ but my ability to…ask the challenging questions in many ways is easier because I am visibly different – do you see where I’m coming from? That’s not just because I’m a woman, but it is easier for me, because I represent…somebody who is tangibly different from the broad scope of [the profession] in general, which in the main is white male heterosexual. That’s starting to change, but that is the predominant culture. But that doesn’t automatically mean that because it is predominantly white male heterosexual it is bad. Within every single white male heterosexual in the organisation there will be different people with different values, different outlooks, different views and we can’t just look at things in one big homogenous group. I do think it’s easier for me because I am outside that perceived norm.

Transformation

Maggie summed up the key element of her leadership style as being transformation, an area focused on by Aviolo (1994):

Fiona said much the same thing, though without using Maggie’s language:

Communication and involvement

All the women stressed the importance of communication in their roles as senior managers, another trait often associated more with women than men leaders (Lau-Chin, 2007). Ruth said: ‘there’s something about sharing information, about trying to get people to discuss things’. Jessica talked about her wish to be approachable and involving, but in a natural, unforced way:

Helen summed up her approach as being a ‘pied piper’ – a shorthand for a charismatic style often associated with men (Lau-Chin, 2007) – applying her own personal skills ‘which are essentially leadership skills…that’s much more the way I am, can’t help it’. She said:

Delegation

The importance of delegation has already been discussed. For Maggie, delegation was an important element in good leadership, but to develop people and to ensure that decision-making is carried out at the most appropriate level, freeing up senior managers for the strategic level work:

People learn: we need to be about learning from experience and encourage people to use their judgement and make decisions. So I try and allow people to get on and make decisions. I don’t want to control everything that goes on…that can be quite challenging, particularly in a hierarchical organisation, because there’s a natural tendency to refer things up…I’m very eager to ensure that the decision-making is made at the appropriate level; I don’t need to make decisions about everything.

Being true to one’s self: the public and the private person

For some, confidence equated with, and was reinforced by, congruence. Ruth was inspired by people who were ‘very comfortable in themselves’. For her – and others – there was a need to combine ‘that whole idea about being a responsible leader and manager but also being true to yourself and your own values is something I found very inspiring from them’. For some chief executives, being true to themselves was a challenge, perhaps because they were still dealing with the challenge of appropriate behaviour as a female CEO with only males as a model (Lau-Chin, 2007). As Ruth commented, ‘it’s very easy to put your suit on in the morning and it can become a sort of cloak can’t it?’ Bella in particular had to work hard at putting on a public face:

Fiona made similar comments about ‘the intersection between the personal and the [professional]’, which she felt to be ‘quite a difficult issue for women in terms of image’, but marrying the two elements together was nevertheless part of her success. Commenting on the relationship between her work identity and her ‘off-duty’ identity, she noted:

The same was true for Diane, who stressed that she was ‘just a human being trying to do the best I can with a set of skills which are complementary to your skills and your skills and your skills, but really very human’. Sometimes, staff expected the chief executive to have a public persona that was associated with a perceived status of the role; this ‘image’ might differ from that of the role holder and could cause tensions. This was Jessica’s experience:

Fiona had similar experiences to Jessica to draw on and comments to make, with a particular focus on the challenge that she made to power hierarchies, which reminded us of Broadbridge and Hearn’s (2008) comment that ‘although men’s dominance is profound, it is not unresisted’.

Taking criticism and admitting error

Inevitably, in challenging leadership roles such as those carried out by the women involved in this study, the individual will receive a good deal of criticism – both justified and unjustified. Often, it was difficult to separate the personal from the official criticism, as Fiona notes:

Diane had a particularly ‘philosophical’ approach to dealing with criticism:

Open communication and responding to criticism was characterised by a willingness to admit error, as Fiona pointed out, and is sometimes not the case, especially in dysfunctional organisations (Furnham, 2010):

Aviolo, B.J. The alliance of total quality and the full range of leadership. In: Bass B.M., Aviolo B.J., eds. Improving Organizational Effectiveness Through Transformational Leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994:121–145.

Broadbridge, A., Hearn, J. Gender and management: new directions in research and continuing patterns in practice. British Journal of Management. 2008; 19:38–49.

Eagly, A. Foreword. In: Lau-Chin J., et al, eds. Women and Leadership: Transforming Visions and Diverse Voices. Oxford: Blackwell; 2007:xvi–xix.

Eagly, A., Johnson, B.T. Gender and leadership style: a metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin. 1990; 108(2):233–256.

Furnham, A., When leaders lose the plot. Management Today, 2010:62–66. [June].

Hearn, J., Parkin, W. ‘Sex’ at ‘Work’: The Power and Paradox of Organization Sexuality. New York: St. Martin’s Press; 1995.

Kellerman, B., Rhode, D.L. Women and Leadership: The State of Play and Strategies for Change. San Francisco: Jossey Bass; 2007.

Kumra, S., Vinnicombe, S. A study of the promotion to partner process in a professional services firm: how women are disadvantaged. British Journal of Management. 2008; 19:65–74.

Lau-Chin, J. Women and leadership: transforming visions and diverse voices. In: Lau-Chin J., et al, eds. Women and Leadership: Transforming Visions and Diverse Voices. Oxford: Blackwell; 2007:1–17.

Parker, M. Queering management and organisation. Gender, Work and Organization. 2002; 9(2):146–166.

Skidmore, P. A legal perspective on sexuality and organization: a lesbian and gay case study. Gender, Work and Organization. 2004; 11(3):229–253.