|
COPYRIGHT 1998 Transaction Publishers, Inc.
The much publicized designation of 1992 as the "Year of the Woman" and the subsequent impressive electoral gains for women offer hope to those concerned about the inequities of the American political system. Although the rise and significance of women in politics is of great importance to those concerned with gender inequity, the concern about the representation of women extends far beyond electoral politics. A less studied but equally important wave of change is underway in the professions as women are beginning to gain access to leadership positions once completely dominated by men.
Since the phrase "glass ceiling" first appeared in the Wall Street Journal a decade ago, increasing numbers of executives, activists and governmental leaders have entered the public debate about the under-representation of women and minorities across sectors of American society and business. Women's rights and civil rights groups promote policies and conduct research with the aim of increasing opportunities for women and minorities, and many corporations have begun to attack inequality within their own organizations with programs designed to create a more inclusive working environment. The Federal Glass Ceiling Commission, a bi-partisan fact-finding commission created as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, is a prominent example of governmental work combating workforce inequality. In their final report issued in 1995, the Commission concludes that increasing workforce diversity at all corporate levels is sound financial policy, and it provides recommendations for breaking institutional "glass ceilings."
As governmental and organizational initiatives to improve women's access to all levels of the workforce increase, women's influence in society will also rise. Elected office is clearly an important venue for women to gain and exert influence, but women's access to power and influence in American society is not limited solely to the political arena. This research expands the view of women in leadership to include women in positions of power in diverse but important professional sectors.
Analysis of data from studies of American elites will help provide answers to provocative questions about the composition of leadership groups in the United States and the representativeness of various leadership sectors. Among other issues, this article addresses questions such as: Do women have limited access to positions of power? That is, to what extent are women under-represented in the professions? Where are the inequalities most significant, and in which leadership sectors have women and members of other under-represented groups been most successful in gaining access to powerful positions? What can we learn from analyzing the characteristics, interests, and political beliefs of women leaders in various professions?
The goal of this research is twofold. The first section will trace women's access to various positions of power over the past decades and test some explanations for the under-representation of women in positions of power. After demonstrating that women are beginning to access power in various leadership sectors, the second section will provide a closer examination of the current generation of women leaders - who they are, what sectors they represent, and how their opinions on political and social issues compare and contrast with one another.
Women and Leadership
Since the 1970s, a growing body of work has addressed the intersection of gender and leadership. Concerned that most classic studies of leadership focus exclusively or primarily on male leadership, feminist scholars provide a new perspective on leadership studies by expanding definitions and conceptions of leadership to include both women leaders and female perspectives on power. As Barbara Kellerman (1984) explains in her review of this literature:
The use of the word feminist is not meant to imply consensus among the scholars to whom it is applied. In fact, these scholars often disagree. However, they do agree that traditional perspectives have often overlooked women or viewed them through a lens shaped by questionable cultural assumptions about women's behavior. (Kellerman, 152)
A primary area of contention within feminist scholarship concerns the uniqueness of female leadership. In short, scholars are divided over the uniqueness of women's voices. Some theorists contend that women approach leadership and prioritize issues in fundamentally different ways than men; an opposing school of thought argues that socialization into gender roles, not a person's sex, is the primary determinant of leadership styles and priorities. Another related controversy, sparked by Virginia Sapiro's (1981) "When are Interests Interesting?", revolves around the cohesiveness of women as an interest group. Sapiro contends that the interests of men and women are objectively different, yet the presence of women politicians does not guarantee they will address these important gender issues. The ensuing debate has moved away from defining group representation, instead focusing on the role of institutional structures and how they may stifle women's voices. Anne Phillips (1991) comments on this debate, calling for accountability in representation as she describes the complexity and potential problems of representing women (a heterogeneous group) as a single interest group.
The most widely studied aspect of women and leadership is the connection between gender and politics. Over the past two decades, the focus of such studies has undergone transformation as the number and length of tenure of female office-holders has increased. Early studies emphasize sociological comparisons of male and female politicians, noting gender differences in elected officials' backgrounds and experiences (see, e.g., Leader, 1977). Other studies investigate the priorities and attitudes of women politicians, juxtaposing male and female politicians' views on issues and legislative priorities (see, e.g., Soule and McGrath, 1977; Gurin, 1985; Saint-Germain, 1989; Reingold, 1992). The most recent work on women legislators is shifting the focus from analyzing gender differences in agendas and opinions to assessing the impact of women on political institutions.
Most studies of women and politics that analyze survey data sample female state legislators to test theories of the relation between gender, agenda-setting, and issue priorities. A recent example of the new wave in gender politics, Thomas's (1994) How Women Legislate, investigates the impact of women on politics through a dual-frame study, analyzing data from a mail survey of male and female state legislators combined with data collected in interviews with a few select women legislators. Thomas's findings suggest that women legislators, once they reach a critical mass, do make a difference in legislative outcomes. Constructing an argument that fits between the two polar views - that women politicians will fundamentally transform legislative norms and procedures contrasted with the argument that higher concentrations of female legislators will make no difference in legislative outcomes - Thomas contends that increasing numbers of women legislators will lead to incremental but significant changes in policy priorities, agendas, and leadership.
Susan Carroll also analyzes survey data in her studies of women political candidates, considering, among other questions, barriers to women's political participation and the discrepancies in the attitudes and behavior of women politicians. In her landmark book, Women as Candidates in American Politics, Carroll evaluates questionnaires completed by more than 1,200 female political candidates. She finds that women candidates have fewer resources, are less likely than men to be recruited to seek high prestige positions, and have different "political ambition structures" than do male candidates.
Most previous work on women in leadership has concentrated on women in electoral politics or case study analyses of various organizations and their adaptation over time. Although these works offer important insights into the role and function of women in politics, these data cannot provide answers to questions about women in leadership in spheres outside of electoral politics. While analyses of women legislators and candidates are instructive, we believe we must also study leaders across professional sectors to provide comparisons of the policy opinions, goals, and perspectives of women in leadership across spheres of influence.
Data and Methodology
To provide a broader perspective on women and leadership in the United States, this...
Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.
|
Bookmark this article
Print this article
Link to this article
Email this article
Digg It!
Add to del.icio.us
RSS
