I’ve been very fortunate, especially in this male-dominated profession, to have worked with several outstanding female leaders and managers. Those experiences have helped immeasurably in the development of my “soft skills” — people skills — which is why I believe the research findings of the Hagberg Consulting Group in its 1998 study Women and the Glass Ceiling to be so on the money. (Hagberg is now part of Accenture.)
Using data from more than 300 male and female executives, director level to CEO, Hagberg compared personality characteristics and coworker-rated leadership and management styles of male and female managers. The study says that as of the mid-1990s, women made up 50% of the work force; however, women held only 13% of all management positions and only 7% of executive positions.
The study posed the following questions:
- Are men actually better leaders than women?
- Are women’s interpersonal, management and leadership styles better suited to the leadership challenges of the ’90s?
- Are specific elements of women’s management and leadership styles helping to create the glass ceiling?
According to co-worker feedback, “women scored better than men on 38 of the 47 measured management and leadership dimensions.” The study also determined that:
- Women are better managers and leaders
- Women’s style may be better suited to the leadership challenges of the ’90s
- Women may be better at managing a diverse work force
- Women are better at motivating others
“So why aren’t more women moving into the executive suite more quickly?” Hamberg asked. “Our data strongly suggest that basic personality characteristics, combined with management behavior and strategies women have used to succeed at mid-management levels, are now preventing them from breaking through the glass ceiling.” The study notes that women’s self-created obstacles fall into three major categories:
- Risk. Women are more reluctant to take risks without having covered all the bases. This hinders them from being given the high-risk assignments that offer visibility and opportunities that make careers.
- Rescue. Women face have a highly developed sense of responsibility combined with a concern for and loyalty to the team. Their orientation toward the group causes them to take on too much responsibility, moving them into a rescuing and mothering mode.
- Righteousness. Because they have done their homework, women may dig in their heels when challenged by less-informed coworkers and present issues in terms of right or wrong. They tend to move from presenting a case for action to defending a cause they believe in.
What does all this mean to female managers?
- Women often have better management skills than men.
- A women’s leadership style is often more motivating and inspirational.
- Women contribute to their own inability to break through the glass ceiling in subtle ways stemming from both personality attributes and learned management styles.
- Self-awareness, combined with focused mentoring and coaching, can help women push through the glass ceiling.
Further progress up the corporate ladder will require women to:
- Start taking risks, focusing their energy and letting go of the details.
- Continue to communicate, develop and motivate staff, and lead by example.
- Stop getting mired in the details, rescuing and mothering, and wearing their hearts on their sleeves.
I also have been very fortunate to have the opportunity to work with women subordinates, both as a supervisor and as a coach and mentor. Those experiences have helped me understand the challenges of being a woman in an organization dominated by men. I like to think that my influence helped them grow and develop as leaders for Chesterfield Fire & EMS, as several of them have becomes lieutenants and captains in the organization; others are continuing to develop themselves for such promotions in the future.
Our profession continues to face a multitude of challenges that we’ve faced for many years, e.g., increased demands for service delivery, funding that does not match the growth in those demands, recruitment and retention of qualified people, etc. Among the new challenges being presented to leaders and managers of fireand EMS organizations is meeting those challenges with an increasingly diverse work force. Dr. Steve Robbins of S.L. Robbins and Associates says this about diversity: “Diversity is not about counting people, it’s about making people count.” If we are to make that so in our fire and EMS organizations, we would be wise to start maximizing the skills and talents of the women in our organizations.
June 15th, 2007 @ 8:17 pm
GREAT Article! Thanks for taking the time to gather and share this information.
June 16th, 2007 @ 9:58 am
I’m concerned about the use of and reference to “better.” Diversity is about accepting and using difference to strengthen an organization, not about who is better than who. Women’s strengths as leaders will complement male weaknesses in their leadership styles. If you want women to stop displaying their distinct styles (mothering, etc.), then aren’t you just developing more male leaders?
Also, I take exception with an article written by a man who talks about having worked with so many capable women, yet uses a research study and his experience in dealing with women as “subordinates” to profess his theory on how women can be successful. How about talking with some successful women, too, and getting their take on leadership styles required in the fire service? Talk about male dominance.
June 18th, 2007 @ 8:34 pm
“Progressive.” “Diverse.” Chesterfield County? I think not.
I have a very close female friend who worked in that department. There have never been uniformed female OR minorities of any type in mid-, senior- or executive-level management. (In 20 to 25 positions, battalion chief or higher). Several non-uniformed professional women who found themselves in the throes of this “Good Ol’ Boy” cesspool quickly found their way out.
These insecure, misogynistic men and their fear of intelligent, self-assured, motivated women will keep true female leaders from reigning in the “Republic of Chesterfield.”
Shame on you, Chief Avsec, for throwing this “corn dog” of a department on a plate and trying to pass it off as steak.
June 19th, 2007 @ 10:05 am
Cheryl, thank you for your viewpoints. I’ve taken a day to really reflect on your comments…. I don’t think that we are really on opposite sides of this issue. I’ve always felt that the information contained in the Hagberg study was useful information for our women to know if they seek leadership roles in our organization; not so that they can become like the majority, but so that their strengths — team building, concern for the group, etc., cited in the study — do not hinder their desire for advancement. Thus, I’ve always shared it with our up-and-coming female firefighters.
All leaders in the fire service need balance in their leadership and managerial behaviors. Heaven knows many male leaders would benefit greatly by developing behaviors that model those of female leaders. That was the point I was trying to bring across in the posting.
I believe that women in our profession would be well-served if they preserve their strengths, recognize situations where those strengths have potential to hinder the pursuit of their goals, and work on minimizing that potential negative impact. Men in our profession can also benefit in their development as leaders by recognizing that they should work on developing leadership behaviors that model those of their distaff counterparts.
June 20th, 2007 @ 10:01 am
Chief Avsec, I just hope you put the male leaders in your organization under the same microscope as you appear to be putting us women.
June 20th, 2007 @ 10:04 am
Ann, I’m not sure you and I are reading the same piece…. I word-searched the posting looking for “progressive” and found nothing; a search for “diverse” found two “hits,” neither of which referred to my organization.
My comments, in this blog posting as well as some of my previous, e.g., Cell-Phone Hypocrites, reflect my views regarding my own organization as well as Fire & EMS organizations in general. Are we lacking in having women and minorities in mid- to upper-management positions? We sure are, but so are many organizations — thus studies like the Hagberg and the reason I felt motivated to write about my individual experiences working with women in particular.
We promoted our first female lieutenant to the rank of captain last year, and within the past few weeks promoted a really good male lieutenant to captain who is our first African-American officer of that rank. We now have more deserving and qualified women and members of minority groups than ever before in our organization who will follow their lead because our firefighters can now see role models who look like them, both physically and mentally.
The near future looks brighter than ever for the promotion of our first female and minority battalion chief because we have now getting the talent into the “leadership pipeline.”
June 21st, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
This Avsec piece hits a nerve with me. Still does re-reading it.
The Hagberg study is nine years old. Since that time, another generation of women AND men has joined the work force. These new additions have grown up on sports teams together, competing academically, and are more open to diversity. Hopefully they will stand up to the stupidity they encounter.
Yes, there still is a good-old-boy network in the fire service, and it still exists in business and the medical field, too. Thankfully, the idiots are retiring and not soon enough. The women — and men — who are really effective in the fire service rarely seek the publicity, and fools are not limited by gender.
These entries remind me of a piece I wrote titled “Because” after I got sick and tired of people using the excuse “Because you’re a female …” or because you’re a mother, or because you’re from Chicago, or you’re Catholic … Irish … Polish … a journalist … a brunette … whatever. There’s always an excuse if somebody looks for one.
Life is not fair, but you don’t stop trying.