We know that organisations face challenges recruiting and retaining women in leadership, as well as significant opportunities when they do. However, the current research on women in leadership only goes so far in addressing this.
In summarising this research* there are three distinct perspectives that emerge. I called these ‘normalised bodies’, ‘problematised bodies’, and ‘embodied opportunities’ for how the experiences women have of our bodies, and the gender norms associated with these, are treated and what these reveal about opportunities for increasing the representation of women in leadership.
Normalised bodies
This is the most popular perspective within leadership scholarship and practice. The emphasis is on women taking advantage of the opportunities available to her and supporting her through ‘confidence’ building or ‘leaning-in’. We see this in the approach of most female focused leadership development programmes.
This perspective acknowledges that women and ‘feminine’ behavioural norms haven’t historically been valued within leadership roles and advocates for giving greater value to these traits. For example, emphasising ‘listening’, ‘collective decision-making’, and ‘care’ as valuable leadership skills so that women can ‘naturally’ be included within leadership roles.
However, this perspective is problematic for two core reasons:
- For a start, ‘genderising’ leadership confines women to performing ‘feminine’ traits or be judged for not doing so (and men judged for doing so). For example, calling women “bossy” for being directive, or “cold” for not displaying ‘care’; or, conversely men “weak” or “soft” for displaying that same care.
- Secondly, this perspective tends to make women individually responsible for their ability (or inability) to progress her career. It doesn’t tend to account for systemic structural issues and support systems. For example, the availability and cost of child-care or gendered norms around domestic labour. It also puts pressure on women to act like men despite their experiences of menstruation, maternity and menopause.
This perspective acknowledges that gender norms around ‘women’ and ‘leadership’ make it difficult for women to be recognised as leaders, but still focuses on women performing within the bounds of those norms.
We need to question the assumptions surrounding this perspective if we want to begin including more women in leadership.
Problematised bodies
The second perspective does just that, and questions the norms of leadership scholarship and practice. In particular, how ‘leadership’ privileges male lives and experiences. For example, there is this pervasive idea that great leaders are these heroic figures who look out for the best interests of their followers and disconnect from their own embodied concerns in order to do so.
These cultural ideologies are intertwined with some of the most popular leadership theories. For example, when we talk about authentic leadership, or transformational leadership we’re usually talking about concepts where leaders are still purposeful and controlled in how they enact leadership. We’re also usually talking about research done by men, on men.
There is very little scope here for accounting for the experiences of women in leadership. For example, if women are really authentic we open ourselves up to being judged (at the least) or (in the worst case) discriminated against and marginalised. We see that time and time again when women become pregnant, and now we’re seeing it as senior women are going through menopause.
These perspectives are an opportunity because they shift the focus from what individual women need to do to survive their careers in leadership to how to create spaces where women can thrive.
Embodied possibilities
The last perspective explores how a greater attention to our embodied experiences can open up more possibilities for inclusion in leadership.
This means acknowledging how different bodies act, and look, and how this might create alternative performances of leadership. It also includes paying greater attention to the feelings and insights that come from our bodies, and how this recognition of our vulnerability and humanity could enable us to connect to others and re-write the power dynamics of leadership.
There is more research that needs to be done here, as well as greater exploration of it’s practical application. However, this is the space our work builds from. The potential in this is greater inclusion for not just women, but anyone else who doesn’t currently fit ideals of leadership. This is a space of exploring what leadership could look like, feel like, be, in a way that acknowledges different lived experiences of it.
The work we do supports organisations to advance their leadership and gender equity goals by applying the research in this space.
You can read more about our research, access a case-study of where we’ve applied our research driven approach, or get in touch if you’d like to know more.
* The research we draw on comes from peer reviewed articles in high ranked journals.
