How IT Organizations Can Develop Women Leaders
How effectively an organization develops its women as leaders depends on the climate of the
organization and its specific work groups. Additionally, it depends on how congenially being a
woman fits with the styles and behaviors subordinates expect from leaders in that climate. There is
no one-size-fits-all answer.
Organizational and work group climates vary widely. Some climates are largely challenging for
women, others are more congenial. Although most climates fall somewhere in between these
extremes, a good jumping off place is to consider the endpoints.
The least congenial climate for women’s leadership development is characterized by rigid hierarchy
and vertical communication through the chain-of-command, by emphases on leaders’ power and
resources, and by singular attention to task performance. The leadership style that is most effective
in these contexts - Contingent Reward - concentrates on rewarding subordinates’ satisfactory job
performance. This context also can foster a management style that focuses on correcting mistakes
and failures, although this approach is ineffective.
In power-oriented Contingent Reward climates, women leaders can be seduced into adopting
leadership strategies associated with power, dominance, and masculinity such as assertiveness,
being autocratic and directive, and promoting one’s self. Each of these strategies can establish men’s
leadership and power. For women, however, they often bring unintended negative consequences
because they violate others’ expectations or stereotyping for women, and they can bias performance
appraisals (see the case of Ann Hopkins). Teaching women in a Contingent Reward climate to
behave in this way is likely to fail for both the individual woman and for the organization.
Without addressing climate itself, these less congenial organizations still can work to develop women
leaders. Leadership effectiveness in these settings is dependent on status, some of which comes
automatically from being male, but also from have having the resources to reward subordinates. To
level the playing field for women leaders, women need to have rewards to distribute and to be
regarded by their subordinates as legitimate. Organizations can facilitate both of these outcomes by
empowering women leaders with resources and by publicly recognizing their qualifications and
skills.
At the more congenial extreme are climates that develop in flatter, horizontal structures with open
lines of communication; emphasize empowerment over power; and value outcomes beyond task
performance such as followers’ satisfaction with the job and leader, followers’ motivation and
professional development, leaders’ effectiveness as judged by both followers and superiors, and
leader, group, and overall organizational performance. In these contexts, the kinds of leadership
styles and behaviors shown to be effective include being an inspirational role model by building on
followers’ trust and confidence, stressing team building and collaboration, valuing creativity and
innovation, and serving as a mentor who actively seeks to empower followers.
Sometimes the kinds of leadership styles and behaviors shown effective in these climates are
referred to as “women’s ways of leading,” suggesting that these strategies are specific to women.
Indeed, these approaches are compatible with stereotyping of women, avoiding the role conflicts
inherent in more masculine views of leadership as power. However, this transformational form of
leadership is exercised as effectively by men as by women.
The role an organization can play to develop this favorable synergy between leaders and climate is to
work on climate, that is, to foster a climate that values change and innovation, that rewards
performance as well as social cooperation and social complexity, and that encourages the sharing of
power and information. Revisiting performance appraisals with these goals in mind takes a positive
step toward changing, or capitalizing on existing, climate.
Across all climates, paying attention to the proportions of women in upper and lower echelons of the
organization can serve as a marker of the organization’s success in promoting women’s leadership. In
addition, having women as both superiors and subordinates can have a positive impact on women’s
performance appraisals. Finally, by assessing the climate of one’s organization, organizational
leaders can identify the types of leadership style and behaviors documented to be most effective in
that climate and train potential leaders to be cognizant of, and responsive to, those parameters.
Ignoring Stereotyping in a Challenging Climate
In Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins (1990), the U.S. Supreme Court for the first time included
psychological evidence about sex stereotyping to conclude that Ann Hopkins was refused a
partnership at this accounting firm because of “gender-based stereotyping” (Fiske at al., 1991, p.
1049). This case highlights the low congeniality of this context where Ms. Hopkins objectively
brought in $25m in business and was praised as driven, hard working, and exacting (i.e.,
masculine), yet where only 7 of 662 partners were women and where Ms. Hopkins was denied
promotion because of “interpersonal skill problems” (p. 1050).
Lessons: The solution cannot rest on individuals alone. No matter how similar to a highachieving man Ms. Hopkins performed, she was caught in the catch-22 of an uncongenial
climate. To correct this situation in the long-range, the organization could work to add women
and change the climate. In the short-range, the organization could reward task performance and
discount subjective evaluations that are likely to reflect the discrepancy between others’
expectations for Ms. Hopkins as an accountant and as a woman.
Fiske, S.T., et al. (1991). Social science research on trial: use of sex stereotyping research in
Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins. American Psychologist, 46, 1049-1060.
The Power of Legitimacy
We conducted a controlled experiment by first establishing a climate that was purposively
inhospitable to women’s leadership. We formed groups of 4-6 men, gave the group a task to do
together that was highly masculine stereotyped, and appointed a solo woman to lead them. We then
simply let the group do the task and scored their group’s performance as our baseline measure of
task performance.
In two other conditions, we enacted the same conditions but brought the woman leader into the lab
in advance of the group. She completed the task alone, was given the answers, then re-tested, scoring
higher after training. Half these women went on to lead groups unaware of her training, and they
fared no better than our baseline. The other half also lead groups, but the groups were told
beforehand that the woman had been trained and knew a lot about the task. These groups outscored
our baseline.
Lesson: Skill is not enough to make a woman an effective leader in challenging contexts. Having the
organization validate her credentials makes her input credible and effective.
Yoder, J.D., Schleicher, T.L., & McDonald, T.W. (1998). Empowering token women leaders: The
importance of organizationally legitimated credibility. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 22,
209-222.
The last piece would be info on how to judge climate.