In the course of constant changes in terms of leadership and management styles, the current trends indicate a higher representation of women in the upper echelons of the leadership positions. For instance, in the Fortune 500, 4% of the CEOs of the companies are women. Despite the number is the highest in the history of business management, the number of female leadership is still a law. The presence of such prominent leaders as Halla Tómasdóttir from Audur Capital illustrates the feminine perspectives can benefit the common ways of operations within the companies, as well as can lead them through the times of difficulties and crisis. Having familiarized with the TED talk and the reading, I can clearly state that there are certain features inherent in the masculine and feminine leadership styles.
For instance, due to a long history of underrepresentation in the leadership positions, women who manage to the highest steps of the career ladder mostly prefer a horizontal leadership style. On the contrary, men would still prefer conventional management and highly hierarchical structures. That is a historic feature that emerged in the course of the long history of underrepresentation. However, the evidence also suggests that men are more likely to make complex decisions much faster than women. This is also a result of the long history of occupying managerial posts. Therefore, the currently existing pattern suggests that the historical factors contributed to the masculine and feminine leadership and management styles.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"Leadership and Management Styles".
Also, women possess another essential strength inherent only to women, which is defined as a power of an individual. That is one of the features defined by Halla Tómasdóttir that helped her to get Audur Capital out of the crisis. At the same time, women are unable to behave respectfully at the leadership positions. The research suggests that this is the feature that prevents women from occupying the high-level positions, as their behavioral patterns were driven by following rather than taking the lead. ‘Prior research has shown that women leaders are unable to express agentic behav¬iors and emotions without being punished (Livingston, 2017). This weakness still prevails in the current context of the working environment. Another vulnerable group that experiences such challenges is represented by minorities. On the contrary, paving a path to the leadership positions easily is the feature that is easily accessible to men (specifically, to white men). Therefore, the behavioral patterns play a defining role while overviewing the strengths and the weaknesses of men and women.
While looking at the efficiency of leaders and defining whether men or women are more effective, one shall remember additional challenges that women entail in their roles. Not only their work is underestimated, but some of their activities may also be interrupted due to family matters. In that respect, I believe that both men and women can be positioned as effective leaders. If a female leader managed to reach the highest echelons of the leadership positions, it is likely that she would be a good leader (given that such positions entail an effective implementation and management skills). However, it is more natural for a man to be an effective leader. In terms of behavior, men are the better listeners than women. In the situation of crises, they are likely to focus on solutions more, while women may still pay a lot of attention to problems.
At the same time, women leaders are likely to understand women leaders, especially while discussing personal performance at work. Hence, the conclusion over the most effective leaders depends on the situation. In most cases, both sexes possess excellent opportunities to perform as leaders.
