The reshaping of feminine leadership in a mixed gender environment

Continuing on the theme dedicated to Team Building, team Effectiveness and GroupThink we are highlighting a thought-provoking research conducted by the Bristol Business School at the University of West England that focused on the different leadership roles of men and women within teams. Specifically, the research question was ‘To what extent is leadership as a sense-making process impacted by gender? Using a pragmatic approach involving the use of induction, discovery of patterns, deduction and testing of theories and hypotheses, Grisoni and Beeby compared the interactions and results of teams comprised either by men alone, women alone or mixed genders.

The research indicated that the essential conservatism originally associated with male professionals permeated all three teams indicating that men and women adopted teamworking strategies for sense-making that contained many similarities. The authors used “meetings” as part of their study because the modern business trend is to utilize team-based leadership that involves more meetings with increasingly growing numbers of women in senior positions.

The essence of the study can be distilled to the following: 
The gendered nature of meetings could be a barrier to the expression of feminine forms of leadership which typically entail ‘managing’, ‘facilitating’, and ‘influencing’ and would instead shape their leadership toward a more mixed gender scheme of ‘developing’, ‘nurturing’ and ‘managing’ attributes.

Questions to ponder:

• Have you experienced a difference in single gender meetings vs. mixed gender meetings? 
• Do you find that feminine leadership is reshaped by the mixed gender business environment?
• How is male leadership affected by the increased number of senior female leaders? 
• Are the male professionals morphing their leadership styles as well? 
• Is this a desirable outcome for the teams in your organization?

Grisoni, Louise, and Mick Beeby. "Leadership, Gender and Sense-making." Gender, Work & Organization 14.3 (2007): 191-209.