Project Notes: A Woman in Leadership

A couple of years ago I worked with 2 colleagues on a project in a busy non-profit serving seniors, people with disabilities and mental illness, and other vulnerable folks.

It was apparent that the executive director (ED) was struggling with uncertainty about how to balance organizational stewardship with the open culture that the people in her organization (and she herself) craved. She appeared to be hovering between 2 vastly different models of leadership, uncertain as to which was right and when. She spoke of her fear of being taken advantage of by staff almost in the same breath as her desire and readiness for others to take part more in the organization. Her vision of leadership was one of power and control, and yet this project itself was indicative of her openness to change.

This dilemma mirrors that of many women in leadership, and the uncomfortable and conflicting feelings about power that we struggle with. Our uncertainty can cause us to default to a top-down control model of leadership. This model has traditionally been valued above all and is still deeply entrenched and encoded in the educational system from which many leaders emerge with MBAs. Collaborative and relational leadership was not even considered to be an appropriate option for managing people until feminists like Carole Gilligan, Riane Eisler, and others began challenging this by talking about the value of women’s ways of being, and the concept of the partnership way (Eisler, 1988) and care ethics (Gilligan, 1982), both of which place a high value on interconnectedness, relationships, and responsibility to others.

"Women in leadership positions are often expected to demonstrate typical masculine traits such as decisiveness, authority, and directness. Women are perceived to work from a care and relational orientation, and these traits may be inconsistent with the traditional concept of leadership (Gilligan).

For a woman newly catapulted into a leadership role, it can be challenging to figure out your own way and to navigate between these 2 models. In this organization, the ED struggled with the need to appear strong and in charge, and this conflict manifested itself in her fear of being taken advantage of by staff vs. the strong sense of care she felt for the social workers in her organization that were experiencing the suffering of vulnerable and marginalized clients.

Although feminism remains strong, gender-laden messages in the media and in daily interactions may confuse women. Traditional perspectives and gender roles may be denigrated by some and expected by others. Thus, the female leader is left in a quandary. (Levitt, 2010, p. 69)

This organization was dedicated to service and caring for marginalized folks, and those that worked there felt their work was meaningful and aligned with their values. Margaret Wheatley reminds us that the role of the leader is to embody the principles of the organization, and then “to help the organization become the standard it has declared for itself” (Wheatley, 1999, p. 130). She says “it takes time to see that a well-centred organization really has enough physical structure to work well" (Wheatley, 1999, p. 132). This ED seemed to be afraid that if she did not exert power, the organization would lack the structure it needed to work well. But according to Wheatley, the structure evolves out of the purpose and principles of the organization, as embodied in the leader.

Because we live in a hierarchical society, we are often afraid to look weak, be taken advantage of, ask for help, or open up the question of control to others. The tragedy in this situation was that the staff were dedicated and committed to what they did, and had ideas, opinions and insights about the possibilities that existed for the organization. They wanted to share them with the leader and take more active roles in ensuring the well-being of each other and the successful carrying out of their mandate. Sadly, the ED had been unable to avail herself of their brilliance and their help due to her fears and having to maintain control. This led her to focus almost frenetically on everything in the organization BUT leading, inspiring, and caring, and this took a toll on the staff, creating worry and stress and a sense of disconnect between the caring principles embedded in their work, and how they experienced the anxiety of the leader and her fear of trusting them.

I am left pondering how to encourage and empower women in leadership to go ahead and change the definition of leadership from control, suspicion, and “power over” to one of interconnectedness, relationship, responsibility to others, and “power with” so that we can all “overcome the basic diseases of the hierarchy.” (Senge)

References

Eisler, R. T. (1988). The chalice and the blade: Our history, our future. San Francisco: Perennial Library.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Cambridge, MA, US: Harvard University Press.

Levitt, D. (2010). Women and leadership: a developmental paradox? In Adultspan Journal. 66-75.

Senge, P. (1990), The fifth discipline. New York: Crown Business.

Wheatley, Margaret J. (1999). Chaos and the strange attractor of meaning. In Margaret J. Wheatley, Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world, 2nd edition, pp. 115-136. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.