”Studies conducted at the EU level, including on Romania’s job market, show that there still is a substantial difference between men and women, when it comes to access to jobs (especially for executive jobs), but, particularly, wages. From the epicenter of feminine leadership where you exercise your duty, how are those studies seen?
According to a study published in January 2020 by Catalyst in the U.S., from all S&P 500 companies, 5.8% have female CEOs. Only 21.2% of board positions are taken by women. 26.5% of senior executives and managers are women.
The percentages are no too encouraging, indeed. If this is the data from a country with more open views when it comes to the integration of women at higher levels of leadership, we can imagine what the situation could be in the case of a more traditional national culture, such as ours.
What is at the moment the reality on the job market when it comes to gender equality?
There was a time in Romania when our expat colleagues were telling us how impressed they were with how many women work here, how career orientated they are. I believe that the generation of women who started working shortly after the ’89 revolution, invested time and a lot of energy in professional development, in becoming better, in keeping both the family and career afloat. That does not mean that results came fast, especially since the image of many people in Romania was that the major role of a woman was to take care of the family, not of the job.
Women have a long way to go if they want to change this mentality.
I dare say that there is a lot of work to be done about the relationships between women. Many times women themselves do not support each other. I still have many situations when female clients want to work with male trainers, facilitators, or coaches. We discriminate against each other. I do not plead for employing women just for the sake of gender balance. However, the Freudian selection of men for certain positions does not honor us, on the contrary, it only perpetuates some clichés about women.
And again, studies show that the women who follow their interests with determination are perceived as aggressive and selfish. Other studies indicate that precisely the failure to follow one’s interest is the cause of the female-leader crisis. How much of this is a myth and how much is reality?
Since time out of mind, society’s expectation was for a man to be the one who hunts, fights, is aggressive, while the woman takes care of the tribe. No matter how much technology has developed, somewhere, in our subconscious, these transferred codes exist.
When the woman is assertive, when she is straightforward, she is considered aggressive, careless, a bi**h, hysterical, you name it. When a man acts the same, it seems more justified, somehow.
I do not believe that a woman is incapable of following her own interest. On the contrary, I believe that she is capable of juggling with both her interest and others.
The issue arises in two situations, I would say:
When women decide to have a child – then, for a while, their priorities change. Her entire attention is channeled, for a while, towards the child. This shows unmeasurable altruism, from my point of view.
Secondly, the issue arises for women when it comes to late-night diners every night, at events. Many business transactions, agreements, plans, negotiations, are closed this way. Women cannot spend every night out. Beyond the business, they also have a family to look after. Of course, this was their choice, at some point, some would say. Yes, but the other part of the relationship has also chosen to be in the family; interestingly, no one raises the issue of him having an equal part in looking after the family. From this point of view, the situation for women seems more difficult. Moreover, if at a table there were 5 men and one woman, I would say that both parties would feel embarrassed.
They say “It’s a men’s world” – and it is true, often, we find it normal to have “gentlemen’s clubs” who play golf, smoke cigars, go on yachts. When women gather in an association, in a club, some (women, of course, men do not really care) will say that they are hysterical, forming a sect and other epithets that the paper would not hold.
Recent studies assign the competency of emotional intelligence a more important role than IQ and technical abilities. Leadership is seen as an art that is based on the leader’s capacity to interact with people – colleagues, business partners, clients. In measuring the efficiency of a leader, how much does the emotional dimension really matter?
It said that ‘soft skills’ are the new ‘hard skills’. The difference does not stem from what a leader Does and Knows, but from the way, they treat those around. ‘I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.’, said Maya Angelou.
Emotional intelligence is as important as rational one. I do not like saying one is more important than the other, I consider the equidistance to be healthier. I believe there is more emphasis on emotional intelligence in recent years, in contrast with the many years when it was not important How we did something, but rather What we did, especially in the area of leadership.
From your point of view, what are the 5 essential qualities of a female leader?
Competence, having knowledge about the field where she works, sufficient enough to have intelligent conversations with her team.
The ability to see things from above, but to also look at the details when needed.
Open-mindedness, the courage to try new things.
Openness towards others, the capacity to create and maintain constructive relationships with those around.
The capacity to reflect upon herself, to better herself.
Integrity – this applies to me too; I would dare say it applies to any job.
Evidently, to be a good leader, regardless of gender, you need to have a set of intellectual skills, abilities, and professional competencies. However, studies show that in order to follow the same professional route, when it comes to women something else is needed, more work, luck, sacrificing power, etc. Therefore, women have specific challenges, that men do not come up against on their path towards success? What does a female leader have to give up once in a position with high responsibility?
As an executive coach, I work with female CEOs or from top management teams. The time they can spend with their family, friends is much shorter than that of a woman without this kind of role. Traveling abroad, multiple meetings, various events where they have to participate, make a leader, woman or man, spend less time alone, home, with their family. If, as I said before, a man can withstand this imbalance more easily, for women it is more complicated.
Many are mothers – and this role comes with responsibilities, with self-blame, with delicate situations when the kids can become ill just to get the attention of a parent.
A woman wants to look good, to take care of herself; to buy different outfits, to go to the hairdresser, to the gym. When in a leadership position, on the one hand, the pressure on her image can be powerful, on the other hand, her time is drastically reduced. She gives up on herself to perform at work, to keep her family in balance and to be a good mother. Giving up on yourself is a mistake, however. The level of stress can be quite high, the ability to hold all the balls in the air at the same time comes with exhaustion, irritability, tension.
How much is a myth or reality the idea of finding a work-life balance for a female leader? Do male leaders find this balance easier? The recent global movement for gender equality is a natural movement or some kind of political correctness? Do we really need European directives to impose a correct balance of forces in the case of management positions?
As I mentioned before, a female leader wears several hats, juggling with them depending on the situation. And society expects her to juggle gracefully, with delicacy, which often happens. Sometimes, however, she might drop one of them, or just simply, this constant juggling can become exhausting.
I believe so, we need European directives, at least for a while, until we educate ourselves otherwise. It seems as common sense to treat each other with respect, to have equal rights. Common sense is the most distributed thing in the world, said Descartes, that is why we have so little of it. That is why we should not rely on it, but set some standards, some rules instead.
If we want to change the way traffic is run, it is good to implement driving rules that we can all follow. Of course, there will be deviations. But the critical mass is formed only with clear boundaries.
If for thousands of years we worked in a way, we cannot be delusional in thinking that we can change the way things work in a few decades.
When you hear about the violence against women, now, in the 21st century, you become terrified; when you hear the comments on tv about violence, you realise that many still have a backward mentality. Nothing will change with nice words, we need rules.
Basically, what do women bring from a top position for an organisation?
Balance, different perspectives. Just for fun, Arianna Huffington said that Lehman Brothers might not have ended up bankrupt if the company had been Lehman Brothers and Sisters.”
via: Revista Cariere