example of the better manager woman or man essay

Example Of The Much better Manager: Woman Or even Man? Essay

[First Last Name]

Business [Number]

[Date 30 days Year]

Introduction
The particular rise of females top managers within the last years is nearly phenomenal. Simply because early as 2006, female Chief Economic Officers in main American corporations makes up 7. 5 % of managers within this position plus female Leader Officials around 1 ) five percent, a substantial embrace representation through the levels (3. 0 percent plus 0. 5%, respectively) seen in 1994 (Huang and Kisgen 822). This feminine representation, though, continues to be too small to not indicate the presence of culturally defined stereotypical bias against women for that management position, the so-called ‘ glass ceiling’ barrier against ladies in the place of work. This statistics may explain the limited influence that ladies have in the top management of contemporary corporations. However, it shows nothing about how woman and male supervisors perform relatively in their jobs. This essay will try to bridge that informational gap by supplying a consolidated record from your current executive gender difference materials.
This task, however , reflects a growing desire for the study of gender differences among supervisors and top professionals not just about their legal ramifications in a weather of increased issue over employment discrimination but also in the effectiveness of their management and leadership styles, which, as early because 1997, have reached the far continent of Australia (Palmer and Kandasaami 67-68). The trend calls regarding more enthusiasm among students and experts in the field of business and management for more contribution.
Nonetheless, I will focus my analysis of the selected literature on the subject of management as a whole (not on leadership alone), which is essentially an administrative function, including such tasks as setting budgets, monitoring operational progress, and making sure that things work in the day-to-day business operations (Maccoby 57). Although, these tasks are essentially delegated to subordinate users of the division or the departmental team, a good manager needs to know these tasks by heart and with obvious standards of quality to ensure accurate, relevant, effective, and efficient performance. Thus, it is not often correct to contend that good management is dispensable when subordinate competencies are high.
On the other hand, leadership is a connection, albeit an influencing and not a managerial (administrative), function that nevertheless plays an essential role in the manager’ h job, which also involves people management, relationship enhancement, and subordinate motivation with regard to positive changes in mindsets and work values (Maccoby 57). Oftentimes, though, the managers will on their own in situations that call for effective leadership to resolve or accomplish (e. g. a company-wide change program that must take main and establish new methodologies and culture in the manager’ h department). Considering that scenario, leadership will be included here like a non-administrative function of the manager and only one of the many functions of the manager, whether or not it plays an crucial role in driving employees toward switch and upgrading overall corporate performance in human resource competency, organizational processes, and finance.
The first two sections of this essay present specific characteristics of the feminine and the masculine management styles that had been found crucial and valuable in the functions of female and male executives, respectively. In the attention of uniformity and comparability, these qualities are grouped in to in-paragraph subsection groups, namely: decision building, people management, management style, personality qualities, and overall management style. All characteristics mentioned in each of these sections are stronger qualities of either the female or the males executive compared to each other, respectively. Less prominent characteristics are given less emphasis.
The third section efforts to differentiate these gender-defined managerial characteristics based on five non-comprehensive categories (decision making, people management, leadership style, individual traits, and overall management style). A brief discussion follows within the positive and bad implication of these traits to the company as well as its stakeholders, particularly the shareholders and the employees.

The Feminine Management Style

There are specific qualities in the management style of women professionals that play important roles in their achievements in the job; traits that distinguishes the feminine approach to that of the masculine. These talents are categorized, less comprehensively, into decision making, people management, leadership style, individual traits, and overall management style.
Decision Making: (1) Financial Decisions: Female executives, according to Huang and Kisgen (823), tend to issue less debt and should they are doing, their announcement results in debt choices tend to be higher. These people also usually do not make significant changes, up or downward, to their company’ t overall leverage level or profile. These decision making alignment tends to increase shareholder value through a more financially healthful company with much less financial risks used. (2) Growth Choices: Huang and Kisgen (823) observed that will female executives often grow their businesses more slowly plus less likely in order to do so by means of acquisitions. They furthermore showed greater “ announcement returns” compared to male executives. This particular indicates general buyer confidence to feminine decision making. Additionally , they showed increased scores in this kind of power dimensions seeing that experimentalism and venturesome (Palmer and Kandasaami 71). (3) Profits Forecasting Decisions: Feminine executives tend in order to make conservative profits forecasts, which cause wider trading artists for its gives within the stock marketplace (Huang and Kisgen 823). This really is partially the reason intended for greater acquisition statement returns of feminine executives.
Individuals Management: (1) Dealing with Performance Issues: Palmer and Kandasaami (70) observed that feminine managers use usual of equality whenever handling subordinates along with poor performances where variations in performance perform not dictate just how employees were taken care of as persons managing subordinate functions. Most employees receive equivalent opportunities to develop in their function and luxuriate in the advantages and perks because of them. (2) Dealing with Employee Relationships: Feminine executives are generally cozy and chatty within their approach in order to their interpersonal connections with employees, credit reporting the feminine proneness towards relationships along with co-workers. This generates a warm plus open atmosphere associated with interaction, which speaks strongly with feminine employees but might cause discomfort towards the more direct speaking, and often arranged, tendencies of man employees (“ Whenever the Boss is definitely a Woman” ).
Leadership Design: Female leaders have got stronger transformational propensity in their command style (“ Whenever the Boss is a Woman” ). They provide transformative role models, supportive to employee development, and motivate employees towards dedication and creativity.
Personal traits: Palmer and Kandasaami (69-71) noted supposedly distinctive qualities of females, such as association, attitudinal commitment (e. g. to the organization), attachment, cooperativeness, nurturance, and emotionality. These qualities are important factors in company loyalty and in low rates of employee turnover, which can be costly if not under adequate control.
Overall Management Style: The American Psychological Association (“ When the Boss will be a Woman” ) characterized the feminine management style as typically mentoring or coaching, less authoritarian and more nurturing in approach, and highly favorable in female-dominated organizations in female-dominated industries, such as services (e. gary the gadget guy. employment, educational, interpersonal assistance, advertising, public relations, child day care, hotels), financial services (e. g. insurance), and nonprofits (e. g. advocacy, grantmaking, civic). The management style is interpersonal-oriented, participative, and democratic. This management style tends to be warm, informal, dynamic, and open.

The Masculine Management Style

Like the female approach, the male management style has its own distinctive strengths and drawbacks. Trait categories discovered include decision making, people management, leadership style, personal traits, and overall management style.
Decision Making: (1) Financial Decisions: Huang and Kisgen (823) noted that male executives tend to make income forecasts that constitute significantly narrower rings than female executives. Male managers also tend to be replaced more, usually within four years of tenure, showing general perception of their overconfidence, which risks making non-enhancing shareholder value decisions. They also tend to exercise less deep-in-the-money stock options than female executives, which again supports the theory of overconfidence. (2) Growth Decisions: Male executives tend to be highly confident in investment tasks (Palmer and Kandasaami 67). However, the difference narrows considerably with females of high self-confidence. Moreover, the acquisitions taken by male executives, based to Huang and Kisgen (823), tend to have negative impacts on announcement returns, thus to shareholder value. Men also scored higher in power dimensions of tough-mindedness, assertiveness, and self-sufficiency (Palmer and Kandasaami 71). (3) Income Forecast Decisions: Huang and Kisgen (823) found male executives to be highly optimistic in their earnings forecast, which investors tend to distrust, resulting to significantly narrower share price bands in the stock market.
People Management: (1) Handling Performance Issues: Palmer and Kandasaami (70) noted that male managers use equity norm in handling employees with poor performances. (2) Dealing with Personnel Relationship: Masculine executives tend in order to be more task-oriented than relationship focused to enable them to be simply regarded as more managing that their feminine counterparts (“ Whenever the Boss can be a Woman” ). This highly businesslike approach tends in order to alienate female workers that are more comfy in a comfy interactive atmosphere exactly where positive emotions are usually permitted some independence of expression. Nevertheless , this fits properly with male workers who tend in order to talk more upon work matters compared to personal chattiness.
Leadership Style: The particular male leadership design tends to end up being autocratic where manage features paramount significance as well as the voice associated with the top management, even without worker consultation, is anticipated to be the particular law. They are likely to make use of wider strategic runs in their impact strategies, which are usually more positive compared to negative. They furthermore make more affecting attempts than women (Palmer and Kandasaami 70).
Private Traits: (1) Self assurance: Older studies discovered no significant distinction in the work-related self-confidence between women and men managers (Maccoby 57). However, an over-confidence has been discovered by Huang plus Kisgen (823) within male financial choices. (2) Other Attributes: Researchers (Palmer plus Kandasaami 71) furthermore found masculine power in the attribute of commitment (i. e. in expert associations).
General Management Style: Many men traditionally known intended for their typical “ command and conquer” management style, which usually is highly well-known and effective within male-dominated organizations within male-dominated industries (“ When the Employer is a Woman” ), such since development (e. grams. construction), academics (e. g. mathematics), bulk media (e. grams. sports reporting), govt service (e. grams. law enforcement, military services, politics), food preparing (e. g. chef), technology, entertainment (e. g. comedy), plus services (e. grams. accounting and fund, emergency-firefighting). The administration style is task-oriented, highly directive, autocratic, direct, sometimes frosty, and less open up.

The Feminine-Masculine Differences

In the particular field of sex analysis in the particular management context, specific traditional gender-specific stereotypes have been long recognized. For example, the masculine gender as characteristically masculine had already been described as self-reliant, aggressive, competitive, plus decisive. Conversely, women were considered womanly, and described since sympathetic, gentle, timid, and sensitive in order to the need associated with others. Nonetheless, using things equal, it really is reasonable to acknowledge that feminine plus masculine management designs are equally efficient. Nevertheless , when seen in the organizational circumstance, significant differences can be observed (“When the Boss is a Woman”).
Decision Making: There is overconfidence of male managers in their financial and growth decisions, tending to be more aggressive and risk-taking, relative to female managers who tend to be more conservative in handling finance and gradual in expanding business reach. The masculine management style poses a danger to the shareholder value while allowing for a stronger and faster growth performance when things work well as planned. The feminine management style ensures a risk-free financial management while risking getting left out in a highly competitive environment where decisiveness can be crucial in taking opportunities to increase the market share (“When the Boss is a Woman”).
People Management: Women managers tend to be warmer and chattier than their male counterparts who tend to be direct and autocratic. This differences in their approach towards their subordinates brought important uniqueness to their respective management styles that will not work in environments where the other is well-accepted. Female employees will experience an increased level of distress when working in an autocratic and relationally cold environment. Conversely, a chatty officer candidate will not be respected in a military organization (“When the Boss is a Woman”).
Leadership Style: Studies as far back as 1972 (Palmer and Kandasaami 68) showed no difference between women and men in their leadership characteristics, such as influence on their staff, strength of their respective agentic as well as communal qualities, and assertiveness. However, growing studies showed that differences in the female and male leadership styles (Alemie ‘ back-cover summary’ ) with the females tend to be more transformational and participatory and the males more work-oriented and autocratic (“ When the Boss is a Woman” ). While this may be useful in less hierarchical structures in many companies today, it will certainly boomerang in traditional male-dominated environments, such as organized sports. Meanwhile, males are known to be autocratic leaders. While this style works perfectly in command-and-control corporate environments, it will backfire in relationship intensive retail settings. However, these differences narrow considerably with women of high self-confidence.
Overall Management Style: More comprehensive studies of stereotypical traits in the ideal manager (e. g. Ryan, Haslam, Hersby, and Bongiorno 477-478; “ When the Boss is a Woman” ), however, showed that the feminine and masculine qualities were equally associated especially for effective companies. Specifically, nine of 11 female traits overlapped with six of eight male traits. This overlap indicates certain traits that female and male executives in their work qualities. However, the areas where they do not overlap tend to define their ultimate gender-conditioned management style, which will be warm, developmental, and conservative among female executives and direct, autocratic, and risk-taking among male managers. Alemie (back-cover summary) observed differences in such areas as emergence, overall usefulness, and employee acceptance.

Conclusion and Recommendation

It has been established in the gender management books that the concept of the ‘ good’ or ‘ successful’ manager was a concept of the male manager (Ryan, Haslam, Hersby, and Bongiorno 470, 476-477). Considering the essential differences between female and male managers (descriptive), the selection of managers almost automatically screens out the female candidates (prescriptive). At times, even with many important similarities between the genders, the stereotypical bias does the screening out.
The studies on management contexts revealed that gender differences in management styles work best in congruent environments. The feminine and masculine management style works best in female and male dominated companies, respectively. Placing a woman (or male) manager in a male (or female) dominated company may result in temperament and management style compatibility problems. Managers who insist on working in companies dominated by the opposite gender should be prepared to adapt the strengths of the opposite-gender management style in order to succeed. Since decision makers for promotion selection belong to the opposite gender, e. g. female, and are more attuned and confident to the effectiveness of the feminine management style within the organization (“ When the Boss is a Woman” ), the odds are expected to be overwhelmingly against the male manager’ s career advancement. Female managers must learn the ‘ command-and-conquer’ style of management; while the male managers the mentoring-coaching management style.
The movement towards equal employment opportunities is gaining speed each year. It is inevitable that someday male managers and female managers will be more or less equally represented in the management team. Certain companies (e. g. Sodexo) already managed to do that. However , while change remains in transit, it is wiser for managers to exploit the gender context and perhaps wait reaching the top for the opportunity to make gender-oriented changes.

Works Cited

Alemie, A. B. Perceived Difference between Male and Female Supervisors: The Impact of Gender
Stereotyping on Leadership Style, Emergence, Effectiveness and Acceptance Saarbrucken, Germany: Panel Lambert Academic Publishing, 2011. Print.
“ When the Boss is a Woman. ” American Psychological Association. possuindo. 22 March 2006. Web.
Huang, J. and Kisgen, D. J. “ Gender and Corporate Finance: Are Male Executives Overconfident
Comparative to Female Professionals? ” Journal of Financial Economics 2013: 822-839. PDF file.
Maccoby, Meters. “ Understanding the Difference between Management and Leadership. ” Research
Technology Management January-February 2000: 57-59. PDF file.
Palmer, G. and Kandasaami, T. “ Gender in Management: A Sociological Perspective. ” The
World Journal of Marketing August 1997: 67-99. PDF file.
Ryan, M. E., Haslam, S. A., Hersby, M. Deb., and Bongiorno, L. “ Think-Crisis – Think Female: The
Glass Cliff and Contextual Variation in the Think Manager – Think Male Stereotype. ” Diary of Applied Psychology 2011: 470-484. PDF File.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *