Leadership and Gender Response

I learned that gender is still an issue in our world as we speak.  I have received the impression that women, as a majority, write to address women in a similar circumstance and men do the same for their own.  Even as leadership is discussed, we do it from different perspectives which also suggest that there are different approaches.  Two of the readings for this assignment were about how females can be a boss without being seen in a negative light and for how males can stand firmly on their ground with a military mindset.  The main lesson that I continue to learn is everyone who sees themselves as a leader has the aptitude to reteach how they feel they achieved that status.  There are several possibilities to define yourself as leader and even more ways to define success for what you feel the term means.

Also learned about becoming a true leader, you have to find your individual route or make one if you can.  There are many steps to accomplish almost anything you want to do in this world.  If you can research a subject then its fair to say that someone else has done it to a level that is worthy of paying attention to.  As you read about it, realize that you might not have attempted this yourself but you can improve on the accomplishment.  You can either subsequently replicate their method or you can create your own path to your personal dreams.  There are few people, if any, that can know you better than you know yourself.  The guest speakers we had talked about the routes they took for their current career paths.  One was redirected in the middle of the process then found the destination and another decided where they wanted to be and pursued that particular avenue from nearly the beginning.  Both were able to decide what they felt was best for themselves through experience which is a tough lesson to learn.  Even as you face trials and tribulations, there are always alternatives for you to acclimate to as you reach the pot of gold at the end of your rainbow.

My leadership style is less defined by gender as it is by personality and character.  I am able to lead myself but if anyone else believes in me or my style and follows is not really up to my discretion.  Personally it is to be viewed as influential more than as direct guidance.  To state it simply, I try to do what is best for me without hurting or confronting many other people.  There are suggestive inklings of what and how I think in many of the writings and presentations we have been exposed to this semester in addition to the reasoning which plays its role as well.  I would say that I am a compilation of what was prior but I held some of the views expressed before I seen it in others.  One characteristic that I feel leaders possess is the ability to amend their surrounding with their presence.  A leader can have a true impact if they can improve their environment by introducing themselves into the mix instead of plainly blending in with what is customary to merely find a place that fits.  Aside from specifying my message, I can find a few similarities in myself and the various contributors.

Benchmark of Women's Leadership

Women having roles in leadership is the topic of this article.  This piece was the official report of a study performed by the White House Project.  It discussed how the fields of Academia, Business, Entertainment, Journalism, Law, Military, Nonprofits, Politics, Religion and Sports would all benefit from putting more women in charge.  It later goes to recommendations on how to acquire more leadership positions and what are the important things to know about the appearance of each industry.   

Now, I do not think the topic is misguided but I do feel the perspective can be questioned.  To say we need more women to rise up the ranks is fair.  There is always time for a momentum shift in society where a perceived lower class can be beneficial to everyone if they were able to achieve equal opportunities.  The data as it is presented does not necessarily say how the adjustment would be favorable to have fewer men in those positions.  As a minority, I understand the call for change.  We can all say why we need to see more people like ourselves in the world.  It is not just for diversity but for the potential of the next generation to have hope.  However I also know that if I cannot out do the person currently in the job or stop the progress of them to maintain themselves as the standard then my efforts will be nullified.  I feel the study could have been helped by concentrating on specific women that would enhance the job if they were to have it versus emphasizing statistics for why so few women are leading men in each division of the professions.  To condense this topic to certain women that are the best examples would be a better argument for its cause.  Then if proven to be true then they could open the door for more who have real capabilities of producing improvements over what was previously done.  The report does not discuss why the numbers are the way they are necessarily but only that they should be different.   

If we were able to learn about the women currently in each field, it could add to the reason their proposed alternative should be implemented.  We can have examples where the top earning men are compared to the top earning women and see the disparity.  We can also use illustrations of the upper and lower levels of women and determined how that came about.  Let’s study if that segment of data is copacetic or if there are biases and preferential treatment being accepted to get to that point.   

I learned that women are underrepresented in many areas of leadership throughout the workforce.  Nominating women for roles and comparing current participants would provide more accurate information for someone who is not aware of the situation and using a novice’s viewpoint.  The report shows leading to correct the course is as important as calling for more representation for results. 

Leadership Discussion pt. 2

Dr. Eagly comments after her presentation were interesting yet sorted.  There were at least two statements that stood out to me.  The first was her research was to find empirical answers to gender and leadership questions which, till then, psychologists were not able to do.  I point to this because I thought her answers were still normative to some degree.  When discussing leadership and how women can advance, she mentioned overcoming stereotypes, nurturing women's approach and not having to be like a man.  Those critiques provide an answer but not one that is factual on a plan to accomplish the goal at hand.  Another point of her argument was not to study women for leadership roles because they did not have them.  I do not think this perspective helps her position.  It would be good to study women to see how leadership is missing what they can provide.  Her study can be assisted by seeing the qualities that women would bring as improvements instead of seeing how the genders are different.

The balance question is another topic all together.  She later inferred that the bias is continued by men promoting men and masking it as only hiring the best person for the job without considering women.  Gender equality will be brought about by equal power was something else she offered.  However to have an admitted feminist stance and speaking at a women on top conference, what type of equality or balance is trying to be achieved.  I think appropriate balance can be created by accepting that the genders are different.  Let's understand that there are different beliefs in how to move forward by each.  Men have pursued those roles as a feat to perform for as long as we can remember.  To see how that was completed and the results of it, could respond with women wanting the same but not in the same way that they were able to see it happen.  If we could see what feminine characteristics are sought by men, it would open the door to a discussion on how this can be reversed in some way.  The possibility to begin there exist but I do not know where it shall end.

What she is speaking about makes me want to question what the goal a person is attempting to reach is.  There are people on both sides that want to take from the other to create their own space instead of accentuating the positives of how they can complement each other.  I feel that anyone is worth listening to and has a right to their opinion.  You never know when the next great individual will utter words that can change the future.  And this can come from either gender.  I think it is important to be ready for those words whenever they are spoken or written.  We should also prepare for the opposite too.  As someone could simply be designing their own agenda with the support of credentials and an organization to say they are credible even though their message is destructive and polar.

Leadership Discussion pt. 1

To start, I do not agree with Dr. Riggio that the question is dangerous.  As he stated in the article, the answer you will receive will give insight into what leadership style the person being asked feels is most effective.  To ask the question alone only allows someone the right to give their opinion.  Instead of a calamitous outcome, it may begin a discussion that could begin the exchanging of information and persuade one to think differently about the matter.

I do agree with his viewpoint of the contrasting modes of how someone is seen as a leader.  The natural born leader who has the innate abilities to direct others and is recommended by the higher ups really do exist.  Then there are some who can learn from others and develop into a leadership role after gaining confidence with the right kind of help.  We see instances of both types in the world accompanied with varying levels of success.  The division would be in what version of leader you need at the time.  If something is original and has no precedent, you may not be able to develop someone to take control and progress it forward.  It might require someone with radical techniques to grow with it.  Contrarily, like the styles, once a person is present to get an organization off the metaphorical ground and establish it as a winning entity, they can prepare someone else to continue what has been done.  It could then be improved or shown a new direction for prosperity.

The last paragraph of the article I have mixed emotions about.  First, it is a time-honored position to believe in and accept that all leaders are extroverted.  Extroversion can be associated with getting to the front, rallying the crowd and telling everyone the plan.  We have seen this over and over again.  However, I feel there is a very rare quality to introversion that can be integrated into the most elite form of leadership.  Introverts are able to be themselves in a quiet and reserved way.  If their approach or method of acting can be interpreted as leader-like acumen and astute, it could be welcome by others.  People can see or understand what they did and begin to attempt to do the same.  I feel this is more effective because it was not sought or called for by the perceived leader.  Nor is it the direct choice of another authority figure.  It does get emulated and repeated by the new followers as a result though.  That would show the competence to be able to select your own path and develop yourself into what you chose.  And it appears that was not taken into consideration as a possible option by the author.

Being An Entrepreneur

    The concept of ownership is very critical to any business endeavor.  Ownership can determine the mission, direction and approach of an organization through leadership that may be replicated in every aspect of the business.  Having a fixed leader can have an effect on hiring practices, corporate culture and workplace mentality.  The structure begins from the chief executive or chairperson and it partially reverberates to the executive board, upper management then regular employees in addition to the consumer and investor markets.  The very essence of the business can be channeled from who is in charge to run it.  Ownership and leadership may very well be the most influential component to any identifiable commodity, corporation or otherwise.  Now let me go into detail about how you can build your entire company in the image of its head.

Imagine having a business of your own.  You are able to obtain a trademark for an original name of your concoction.  There is a process to purchase land and build a location as you wish.  Then you can acquire property and assets that you feel are in the best interest of your business setting.  Next you hire personnel that can help your organizational growth and represent it as their own.  The pattern being established is everything comes by way of your approval.  It is more than your fingerprint being placed in the molding of a corporation.  You are beginning from nothing but your ambitions and desires.  That initial dream you had is coming to fruition through hard work and effort.  That type of thought process and strategy are implicitly contained in the invention of the business.

You can continue to raise the metaphorical brainchild with the people you choose to introduce it to.  The hope that everyone who works for a business has its best interest in mind is the trustworthy philosophy of an optimistic owner.  This would be seen through by adding people to the roster that want to see the business flourish and reach its pinnacle just like the owner.  You should not want to sabotage your company as an employee.  From this perspective, you may not get the most talented people or the ones with great experience.  However, you may get the chance to see people who feel as if they have as much or more invested in making this venture a realized triumph as long as they are a part of it.  Employment can mean committing yourself to your workplace for income and prosperity.  That can be a mindset as valuable as any asset you could purchase or skill you can attain. 

The culture can be a direct function of the person in control.  Whether the leader is seen as a volatile risk taker who moves at warp speed or a very conservative, sensible and methodical human being, it is possible to view the organization in the same light.  This can fall to either extreme of being faulty or virtuous from the outside looking in but there is reason to believe that the owner would not have it any other way.  To create an organization yourself is also constructing your identity as you are going to be associated with it using firsthand respects.  You can principally manufacture the perception that others have as if it were a product.  This has led to people being celebrated for corporate accomplishments. While others have been scoured and removed for mitigating disasters.  The empirical influence that one has can affect the business in more ways than are conceivable to my mind at the moment.  

Consider a physical body.  What you see with your eyes or hear with your ears can determine the direction you move in and what you consume with your mouth can produce how the rest of your anatomy feels and reacts.  This is the picture I am trying to paint for how important owning or being the head of something is.  I will take the stance of the top-down style of leadership is more effective and conducive to this topic.  It greatly decides what the business will do, who will be incorporated and how others will see it.  If that is not an integral component and the epitome of building a great company then maybe my head was in the wrong place when writing this paper.  And that will be an oversight that I guess I have to own up to.

Historical Leadership

My thoughts on the historical view of leadership and how it has evolved has not been changed that much with the recent readings.  Leadership is usually seen as a head of state or the crucial active agent of a transition.  Niccolo Machiavelli’s contribution of The Prince which is an informational depiction of how leaders are perceived, how they will act and what they should be aware of may have been radical during its time but is not as shocking now(1505).  Written in the 16^th century, Machiavelli goes in depth about principalities, land, governing, followers, armies, enemies, wealth and much more in 26 chapters.  We were asked to read ten of the chapters for the purpose of this assignment.  Some of the ideas that increased or enhanced my understanding were from chapters XV and XVIII.  The following quotation is from chapter XV, “for a man who wishes to act entirely up to his professions of virtue soon meets with what destroys him among so much that is evil”.  The context of the quote and overall chapter is that a man who is virtuous must know about and adapt to the evil of his opposite.  To say a good man will succumb to his foes if he were not to amend his methods is a profound statement to make.  We have seen some of our greatest leaders survived by others who were not as significant for their time.  The leaders were usually lost in the confrontation of opposition to principles and beliefs of which they stood for.  We see this as a moral sacrifice and a testament to the will of an individual for the fight for what is right and good.  The idea I get from Machiavelli’s statement states that the loss of life can be avoidable though the valiant heroism can be negatively affected.  Would history be viewed the same if the person had not died in their prime and lived long enough for the image to be tarnished?  A prevailing thought in accordance with that comes from chapter XVIII.  For any sort of longevity leaders should know about and be talented in the ways of both beasts and men.  The ways of beast are devious while men are honorable but one should be able to combat either when called upon to do so.   

                To address some of the myths of history, gender and leadership I will lean on some of the writings of Laurel Ulrich from the book Well Behaved Women Seldom Make History (2007).  One very important statement found on page 50 says that “History isn’t just what happens in the past.  It is what later generations choose to make of it”.  My take of this is that the events, as they happen, are not imperative if it is not relevant at a later time.  That is a brief but powerful statement to define what history is.  As we grow and advance, how do our values progress when we look at the past?  Something that was significant may no longer reside in the same context for the present audience.  Meaning the present actually rewrites the past simply by maintaining pertinence of the moments as time goes by.  To me, that is a stunning divulgence of not only how we remember history but how what we consider historical is created.  To coincide with that observation is the stories of amazon women in the beginning.  Once the facts are recognized or understood, descriptive language and hyperbole can be added to a story to cause veneration or disillusion.  This aspect can produce a myth with distortion of the actual events which may or may not have held its own against the test of time. 

                My personal plans are not necessarily affected from what I have learned from this reading.  I gained valuable information about how others feel about this subject matter but to be cognizant of what others believe is an honest attribute of critical thinking.  One thing I do take from this exercise is to make sure what I am doing now is worthy of being remembered by anybody with a positive connotation if possible.  I do not want to be the antecedent of nightmares and regrets for people.  I can elude that circumstance at all cost from this point forward.  Another theme that I will try to carry on is to preserve a precise portrayal of how things occurred in the instant it does.  Let me try to minimize the breeding of myths from what I can control first.  All in all history may be best defined by what remains from that period or style of leadership instead of what will be remembered.