Historically, successful women in organizations have had to worry about the glass ceiling, which as you know by now, is the invisible barrier that keeps them from ascending to the top of their organization. Well, ladies, I have some bad news. Not only does the glass ceiling still exist, but now you've got to worry about the glass cliff as well.
What's the glass cliff you say? That's the question that Michelle Ryan and Alex Haslam from University of Exeter address in a Harvard Business Review article from January of 2011. What the researchers discovered was that women have a better chance of breaking through the glass ceiling when their organization faces a crisis. Therefore, the women find themselves on the glass cliff, presumedly this is due to the nature of taking a senior leadership role during a crisis situation and facing the steep decline in success does not follow their appointment.
To test their theory the researchers asked college students to read articles about a company with a retiring CEO. There were multiple sets of articles in which leadership was historically men or women and also the company was doing well or poorly financially.
What they found was that regardless of historical leadeship gender, participants preferred a male leader when the company was performing well and a female leader when the company was performing poorly. So the real question is...why?
One thought is that a company in peril needs to be run more delicately than a company hitting on all cylinders. That is to say that participants may have felt that a woman's intuition and caring nature may lead to better leadership during crisis when employees will be concerned about their jobs and characteristics typically associated with women go further than thost associated with men.
Perhaps the respondants thought about when they were younger and in the worst of times they could turn to their mother for the right answers. I dont' really know the why, but the what is that women seem to be viewed as better leaders in times of crisis, but not in times of calm.
Glass ceiling, glass cliff maybe there will be a glass elevator someday, but for now it seems that women are either stuck to the ceiling or left teetering on the edge.
Adam Porth
http://hbr.org/2011/01/how-women-end-up-on-the-glass-cliff/ar/pr
Thursday, June 16, 2011
When Glass Ceiling Helps
Is Glass Ceiling always bad? This statement cannot be completely denied. According to a recent study, glass ceiling works from negative to positive as women move from below it to above it. From ages, women have been struggling and working hard to get into top management roles, working their way out of all obstacles to get into better and challenging roles. Once they overcome these barriers and reach a top notch position, they are perceived as better leaders then men at the same level, as a mark of extra perseverance, courage, and ability. On this side of glass ceiling, when women climb up the ladder to be in a leadership role, people perceive that these women might have worked twice as hard as the men at the same level, so once they get there, people think, ‘They are phenomenal’.
Lot of research has been done to understand women at lower and middle management level, but very little has been done to examine how women at the pinnacle of the organization are perceived. An interesting research, says that women at lower levels are either perceived as caring or competent, but not both. Lower level female employees are perceived to be communal but not competitive, while successful women at middle management are perceived as competent and not communal. Contrary to this view, women at top level are perceived to be caring as well as competent. Amazingly, people do not see these two things viz. caring and competent nature as mutually exclusive in women at top notch management roles. There could be many possible reasons. One of the reasons could be the competition. It may be one of the reasons that middle managers have other managers as competitors; this competition naturally highlights the competence and unfriendly aspects to other. However, when women reach top management level they have less competition and people get to see the other side of them. For instance, Hillary Clinton was seen as the toughest and unfriendly person when she was engaged in highly competitive presidential campaign, but when she occupied the position of secretary of state, she was seen as caring as well as communal. She was not only able to get her job done, but was also able to connect with many diverse groups of people.
Most of the women are perceived to be born with competent as well as communal qualities; they are seen as collectivist and feminist in approach. It could also be Galatea effect that helps women to perform better. As an ideal leader is seen to be participative, collaborative, willing to listen to their followers, and value their opinions. It is mix of these qualities due to which people perceive women as better leaders than men at top notch position. But, perceptions are just the initial thoughts or impressions that we form about people and tend to be stable and salient to contrary information.
Reference-
Sarita Sharma
The Glass Ceiling is Thicker for Women……..
I agree that personality affects a person’s effectiveness and that those who don’t have agentic qualities will likely not experience as much success as people who do. Statistics also show that women who don’t demonstrate agentic qualities will succeed even less. This is due to a factor known as the glass ceiling –as we know it is a professional gender barrier that most women face in their quest for success. Let’s take a look at some relevant data:
Women make up…..
· 46.7% of the workforce
· 37% of lower and mid-level management
· 26% of senior level management/VPs
· 2% of Fortune 500 CEOs
As we progress to the top of leadership within organizations, the percentage of women who fill leadership positions dramatically decreases. As mentioned in my "Equality for Women in the Workplace - Who is Responsible” post, some countries have implemented policies to address this. In an attempt to solve the issue, there is a possibility, however that we are overlooking less costly actions that could be taken to increase the number of women in senior leadership positions.
Statistics show that businesses typically experience competitive advantages by having women involved at the highest level of decision making and management –(higher profit, better share price growth, higher quality earnings, better decisions and better innovation. For this reason, organizations should consider ways to integrate women in their boards and senior leadership teams. So, what can they do to address the issue of women being stuck in lower levels within organizations? Here are a few ideas….
· Increase sponsorship of women: match promising women within the organization with senior leaders who will “market” the women.
· Support career development: rotate women through the organization and provide leadership training
· Recruit qualified women: In the US
While businesses have a responsibility to reduce the effects of the glass ceiling, women themselves also need to play a role by assertively communicating their career aspirations. They need to appreciate the value of mentorship and sponsorship and seek sponsors who will be their loud, vocal “cheerleaders” in the workplace.
In addition to greater assertiveness, women who want to rise to the highest levels within the business community may have to align their personal lives to support that growth. Unfortunately in many households, women are they primary care takers. Due to this, women who want to shatter the glass ceiling may also have to make an important decision: pursue career aspirations or start a family.
Does anyone have any other suggestions or ideas for women who will likely meet the barrier in their career called the glass ceiling?
http://blogs.forbes.com/prettyyoungprofessional/2011/05/04/ladies-who-lead-a-wsj-closer-look-at-women-in-the-economy/
The healthiest economy is one that uses its human resources most efficiently
One of the non-controversial statements that I have read recently is “The healthiest economy is one that uses its human resources most efficiently”.
Lack of women on the corporate board is definitely a symptom for lack of diversity. This means that we are not using our human resources very efficiently. Britain is also inching towards following other countries like France, Spain and Norway in introducing compulsory quotas for women in corporate boards. Some of the basic gender based problems are earning gaps and glass ceiling. This step will at least answer the gender problems and bring in equality. The main problem for the organizations though, is not just about having women in their board, but about having a diverse voice.
Most of the boards essentially have multiple CEO voices, rather than voices that represent different points of view and perspectives. Most of the people on the board have been brought up in the culture of large corporations and have spent their life creating shareholder financial value. Due to the structure of the organization, many critical issues are not even raised and discussed. Due to group think in the board, it is also very easy to miss out on some major problems.
By having a better diversity, the organization would benefit by higher quality and creative decision making. The diverse group would bring in different opinions and ideas which would help the organization consider more alternatives and think out of the box. The next advantage that organizations experience with diversity is better understanding of customers. We can understand our customers better if we have one of those target audience in the board. This is very much possible when we have a diverse group of board members. Organization will have a more satisfied work force when the employees are being treated fairly, which will eventually result in a better organization performance.
Organizations should encourage openness and increase the diversity in the work force from top to bottom of the organization. One of the best ways to break the barrier that the Europeans found was to make it mandate to have a certain percentage for women board members. Another idea is presented in the article, which discusses the option of having true elections for board members which would make it possible for candidates from different backgrounds appear in the board. I think that along with these different ideas, it is also very important to build a culture of respecting diversity, have some diversity training programs, and check the recruitment process. Building a culture of respecting diversity is very important as it enables employees with different demographics and back grounds to feel a sense of belonging. Taking these steps will help the organizations manage their diversity issues better. If the organizations do not give importance to managing diversity, I am afraid they will not thrive in the long run.
Reference
Krishna Garimella
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)