Transcript
TO WHAT EXTENT DOES TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP SUPPORT FEMININE NOTIONS OF
LEADERSHIP?
Submitted by: Shiva Kirti Garimella
to the University of Exeter
as a dissertation towards the degree of
Master of Science by advanced study in Human Resource Management
in October 2014
I certify that all the material in this dissertation which is not my own work has been identified and that
no material is included for which a degree has previously been conferred upon me.
…………………………..
2
Abstract
This study was carried out with a focus on the concept of transformational leadership. The aim was to
see if women leaders generally lead in a transformational manner and if transformational leadership
is feminine in nature. Extant literature was collected, categorised according to a particular pattern and
analysed carefully for this purpose. A few examples of women leaders were also presented and their
leadership styles were compared and contrasted with the transformational style of leadership. The
literature review revealed that women leaders in general lead in a transformational manner, while the
study on specific women leaders found 3 out 4 women leaders to be transformational, supporting the
findings of the literature review. It was also concluded that the extent to which transformational
leadership is feminine, is difficult to judge due to a few imperfections in the methodology used by the
researchers in comparing the leadership styles of men and women with transformational leadership.
The findings of the study can be used to help drop the prejudices that people in general have held
against women, as regards their ability to lead.
3
Acknowledgements
I would firstly like to thank my supervisor, Dr. Emma Jeanes for the advice and support that she
provided. I would especially like to thank my cousin Nida Faruqui, for pushing me to work faster on
the dissertation when I needed it the most. I would also like to use this opportunity to thank Dr.
Graham Perkins, Mr. Stephen Taylor, my friends at the University of Exeter, and most of all, my parents
and my brother for the encouragement they provided throughout the programme.
4
Table of Contents
Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 5
Purpose ................................................................................................................................. 5
The specific research aims and objectives ...................................................................... 6
Description of Structure ...................................................................................................... 7
Research Methodology ........................................................................................................... 8
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8
Types of material used ........................................................................................................ 8
Data Collection Method and Source of Data..................................................................... 8
Type of data used................................................................................................................. 8
Categorisation of Articles ................................................................................................... 9
Analysis of articles ............................................................................................................ 10
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 10
Limitations .............................................................................................................................. 11
Literature review .................................................................................................................... 12
Transformational Leadership ........................................................................................... 12
Measurement of Transformational Leadership........................................................... 13
The Effectiveness/Implications of Transformational Leadership............................. 14
The leadership style debate .............................................................................................. 15
Differences in leadership styles of men and women - literature comparing the
leadership styles of men and women .......................................................................... 15
Literature comparing men and women with the transformational style of
leadership ........................................................................................................................ 23
Critical viewpoints .......................................................................................................... 27
Summary Tables ............................................................................................................. 29
Examples of women leaders ................................................................................................ 30
Indra Nooyi.......................................................................................................................... 30
Mary Barra........................................................................................................................... 32
Anita Roddick ..................................................................................................................... 35
Sheryl Sandberg................................................................................................................. 37
Marissa Mayer..................................................................................................................... 39
Discussion and Conclusion.................................................................................................. 41
Bibliography ........................................................................................................................... 45
5
Introduction
Purpose
Transformational Leadership has captured the imagination of scholars over the past
few decades with most of the literature in leadership being dominated by this particular
style of leadership. This is perhaps because of the suitability of this style of leadership
to the present business context where change is endemic, and where an inspirational
and charismatic leader who can lead companies through such change is the need of
the hour (Bass & Reggio, 2006, pp. 3-16).
Transformational Leadership places an emphasis on intrinsic motivation. Edward Deci
and Richard Ryan define intrinsic motivation as “the doing of an activity for its inherent
satisfactions rather than for some separable consequence. When intrinsically
motivated a person is moved to act for the fun or challenge entailed rather than
because of external prods, pressures, or rewards” (Ryan & Deci, 2000).
Transformational leadership is about devoting time towards the personal development
of followers and about empowering and nurturing them. It provides followers with
creative freedom. The leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of
morality and their purposes are fused. The goals of the followers, the leader, the group
and the organisation as a whole are aligned. This style of leadership seeks to
transform organisations by encouraging, stimulating and motivating the followers to
accomplish more than what is expected of them, looking beyond their self-interest to
work for the company, developing their leadership skills in the process. This leadership
style is contrasted with and is seen as an improvement on the transactional style of
leadership. Transactional leadership is a leadership of exchange as the word
‘transactional’ suggests, with the leader rewarding followers, usually financially, for
successfully completing work that was agreed upon beforehand. The leader also takes
corrective action upon noticing deviations. Transactional leadership can be
categorised into three sub-groups. There is contingent reward leadership, where the
leader agrees with the followers about the work that needs to be completed, with
rewards being contingent upon the completion of the work. There is active-
management by exception, where the leader monitors actively, the performance of the
6
followers, correcting mistakes on the way. Then there is passive-management by
exception, where the leader waits for mistakes to happen and then takes corrective
action in the form of negative feedback or reprimands. (Northouse, 2013, pp. 185-217;
Bass & Reggio, 2006; Humphreys & Walter, 2003; Bass B. , 1991).
There is a general perception, and a lot of research has been carried out in this area
by academics, that transformational leadership is feminine in nature, or that women
are more transformational in their leadership style compared to male leaders (Kark,
2003). While female leaders are seen as or have been found to be, more
transformational in the way they lead, male leaders are seen to follow a style leaning
towards the transactional style of leadership. Academics, based on their research,
have taken different positions on this debate. Some see no differences in the way
women and men lead, and hence on that basis say that women and men are equally
transformational or say that they lead in a similar fashion with there being more
similarities than differences in the way they lead (Wajcman, 1996). They don’t see how
transformational leadership is a gendered concept (Vecchio, 2003). Others see clear
differences in the way women and men lead. The differences they found through their
own research, led them to believe that women are more transformational in the way
they lead compared to men (Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). The purpose of this
essay is to investigate this debate without any pre-conceived notions and from a
neutral point of view, even though the ‘general perception’ has been stated.
This is an important debate to explore because even though for women nowadays
there is increased access to managerial positions, they fail to progress beyond a point
and this is attributed to the inadequacy of their leadership style and leadership skills
(Carless, 1998; Eagly & Carli, 2008). If women are more transformational or even as
transformational as male leaders, and transformational leadership is an effective form
of leadership, there should be no barriers, at least those that are associated with their
leadership styles, for their advancement to top leadership positions.
The specific research aims and objectives
To examine the concept of Transformational Leadership.
To study how women lead, by analysing existing literature with the concept of
transformational leadership in mind.
To look at examples of women leaders with an aim to study their leadership
styles and to see where they lie with respect to Transformational Leadership.
7
Description of Structure
The dissertation is divided into six sections, namely,
Introduction- The first section is an introductory section and it briefly introduces the
topic, talks about the purpose of the study, and lists the aims and objectives.
Research Methodology- This section gives information about the kind of material that
was used in the study and explains how the material was collected, categorised and
then analysed.
Limitations- This section attempts to point out the shortcomings of the study conducted
which may have had an effect on the credibility of the findings.
Literature Review- The third section is the main section of the dissertation titled
‘literature review’ and involves a review of extant literature on the topic. It first covers
the concept of transformational leadership in general. Then there is a critical review of
articles which study and compare the leadership styles of male and female leaders
with a particular focus on women leaders. This is then followed by a review of articles
that study the leadership styles of male and female leaders in comparison to the
transformational and transactional styles of leadership. The articles in both these
sections are organised on the basis of the methodology used in the studies. Each of
these sections, importantly, has an analysis part that attempts to bring the findings of
the studies together, with the research aims in mind. Finally in the literature review,
there is a section titled ‘critical viewpoints’, which presents an analysis of articles that
critique the view that women and men lead differently and that women are more
transformational in the way they lead compared to men.
Examples of Women Leaders- This section presents a detailed analysis of the
leadership styles of five randomly selected women business leaders. The leadership
styles are studied in order to see where they stand with respect to the transformational
style of leadership. For each business leader, there is first a description of all the
leadership traits. These traits are then brought together to compare them with the
transformational style of leadership.
Discussion and Conclusion- The findings of the study are brought together in this final
section, discussed, analysed and the research questions are answered to the extent
possible.
8
Research Methodology
Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to explain the methodology followed to collect, analyse and
interpret the data. The research is a review of extant literature on transformational
leadership and the leadership styles of women and men. The focus was on studying
the leadership styles of women in an effort to compare it with the transformational style
of leadership. The review of the literature was critical, with an aim to analyse the
arguments that the entire debate involves.
Types of material used
Since this is a dissertation that is based purely on literature, the focus was on collecting
as many articles as possible. The method of collection is explained in the section below.
A few text books were also used to study and explain briefly the concept of
Transformational Leadership in general. Otherwise, for the other sections of the
dissertation, articles were used.
Data Collection Method and Source of Data
The articles were collected using Google scholar. The key search words were
‘Transformational Leadership’, ‘women leaders or women leadership’, ‘the leadership
styles of men and women’ and ‘women leaders or women leadership and
transformational leadership’. The decision whether to save a particular article or
discard it was made after reading the abstract and conclusion of the articles. Except
for one or two instances, articles before the 90s were left out of the study.
Type of data used
9
Data can be categorised into two types, namely, primary data and secondary data.
Primary data is raw data that can be collected through questionnaires, interviews,
focus groups and even through observations (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2007).
This is data collected by the researcher, first hand, for the specific purpose of the
research. Then there is secondary data. Secondary data is the collection of data that
is already in existence and is accessible. This dissertation was based on the collection
of secondary data. Secondary data can be both qualitative and quantitative. The data
in this case was qualitative. Secondary data can be categorised into three main sub-
groups, namely, documentary secondary data, survey-based secondary data and
multiple-source secondary data (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2007). The focus in the
case was purely on documentary secondary data, though some of these may be
reporting survey based data. The documentary secondary data included scholarly
articles majorly, journal articles on the internet, and also a few text books.
Categorisation of Articles
Articles that described or discussed the transformational style of leadership were
placed in a folder titled ‘Transformational leadership’. Articles that compared male and
female leadership through various research methods finding differences in leadership
styles in the process, were placed in a folder titled ‘Female leadership’ as the focus in
these articles was on female leadership. Articles that compared male and female
leaders and their leadership styles, finding no differences in the way they lead in
general, some of which directly criticise the researches who found differences in
leadership styles based on their research methods, were placed in a folder titled
‘Critical Viewpoints’, because this was seemingly the minority view. Articles that
studied female leadership styles in an apparent effort to compare them with the
transformational style of leadership, using various research methods were placed in a
folder titled ‘Women and Transformational Leadership’. And finally, articles that
researched women leadership, with the focus being on the problems faced by women
leaders in workplaces, those that explore the implications of women being more
transformational and their effectiveness in workplaces etc. were placed in a folder titled
‘Miscellaneous’. These were basically articles that were vaguely connected, in
different ways, to the topic of the dissertation and some of these were not used
ultimately. Each section had about 10 articles, with the ‘Female Leadership’ section,
where articles that compared male and female leadership styles were placed, having
the most number of articles. Nearly all articles that were directly connected to the topic
were collected and included in the study. ‘Nearly’, because some of the articles that
were relevant could not be accessed. Going by the summaries of those articles, none
of those would have impacted the study to a significant enough extent. A few articles
that were merely vaguely related to the topic and a couple of others that were set in
non-traditional settings like schools and specific countries were left out.
10
Analysis of articles The process of analysing the articles was led by the way the articles were categorised.
Importance was given to the abstract, introduction, methodology, findings and
conclusion of each article. In the process of analysing the articles, particular
importance was given to the overall methodology used, that is, the non-statistical part
of the methodology. The results of the studies were given weightage on the basis of
the methodology used. For instance, in cases where meta-analyses were carried out
or where there was a detailed analysis of all extant literature, the findings were given
greater weightage. In cases where questionnaires were used, importance was given
based on the sample size and on the diversity of the sample. For instance, when the
findings were brought together at the ending for them to be analysed, less importance
was given when the sample size was small. Even the design of the questionnaire was
scrutinised. In cases where the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire, the instrument
that is used to measure transformational and transactional leadership behaviours
(Hartog, Muijen, & Koopman, 1997), was used, the findings were given greater
credibility, because the questionnaire is the one that is most commonly used to
measure these behaviours, which is an indication of the amount of trust researches
have in the questionnaire. Except for the articles that seek to describe transformational
leadership, the articles were critically analysed, with drawbacks being pointed out
where found. In the case of the concept of transformational leadership the focus was
more on introducing and describing the concept, hence a critical view was not taken.
This is because, the focus of the dissertation was on trying to find out whether women
in general lead in a transformational manner. A critical view of the concept of
transformational leadership would take the dissertation on a different trajectory. In the
case of examples of women leaders, the information was taken from articles on the
internet and not from scholarly articles. The leadership style of five randomly selected
women leaders was described. The leadership traits were then analysed keeping the
concept of transformational leadership in mind.
Conclusion
The overall aim was to see if transformational leadership is feminine in nature. Or if
female leaders are more transformational in the way they lead in comparison to their
male counterparts. To set this debate in context, the differences in the leadership
styles of men and women leaders was investigated. From there, the main themes or
the most common behaviours were extracted and compared and contrasted with the
transformational style of leadership.
11
Limitations
Every dissertation or detailed study can be expected to have limitations. The important
thing for a student or a researcher is to be able to identify those limitations and then
actually acknowledge them. This is a demonstration of knowledge, especially for a
student and shows that he or she has not overlooked those limitations and is aware of
them.
The limitations of this specific study are to do with the literature review. Firstly, this is
a dissertation that is purely based on extant literature. For such a dissertation it is good
to study and analyse as many articles as possible. More articles could have been
analysed here, especially articles that compare male and female leadership styles and
those that compare these leadership styles with the concept of transformational
leadership in mind. This was the case though because the focus was on collecting
articles that directly addressed these issues. Articles that were vaguely related to the
topic or those that were set in specific countries or non-traditional settings were left
out of the study, except in one particular case. Secondly, the study could have also
included a chapter that sets the whole leadership style debate in context, which would
have made the study more interesting to read. For instance, more could have been
said about the effectiveness and implications of transformational leadership to
increase the importance of the comparison to transformational leadership. Thirdly, as
is noticeable, each article is described and there is an analysis towards the end. The
usual way to write a literature review is to present an argument right from the start,
using the literature as evidence to support the argument. Here, there is a greater
dependence on the articles with the articles being described first. This is a limitation
from a strictly conservative and traditional point of view. The author sees the approach
that was used as a new take, where each article is analysed separately, where the
common themes are brought together and analysed at the end of each section. Fourth,
the articles that were described and analysed are not very recent, except for a couple
of meta-analyses. This was because of a lack of recent studies that directly address
this particular topic. But in defence of this flaw, these are gender related characteristics
that were studied here and you wouldn’t expect them to change dramatically in just a
decade. For the first three limitations, ‘time’ was the major constraint.
There were also limitations with the articles that were analysed. One specific limitation
stood out. This was in the case of articles that made a comparison of the leadership
behaviours of men and women. When one compares leadership behaviours, there
should be an equal focus on both men and women. For instance, if 10 women are put
through a detailed interview, the same should be done in the case of men with the
sample size being the same. Then, when it comes to the description and discussion
12
of the findings, both men and women should be given equal space in the article. That
is how one compares leadership styles. In the articles here though, the focus was
more on women leaders. Even where the leadership behaviours of men were studied,
they were given less space in the article with more being written about the way women
lead.
Literature review
Transformational Leadership
The term transformational leadership was coined by Downton in 1973, when he
included a chapter titled ‘Transformational Leadership’, in his book, ‘Rebel Leadership’.
In 1978, political sociologist James Macgregor Burns expanded on it. This was when
the topic gained the attention that it deserved. Burns distinguished Transformational
leadership from Transactional leadership and saw these two styles of leadership as
being at opposite ends of a continuum. Transactional leadership is a process of
exchange that takes place between leaders and followers, where the leader
contractually promises rewards for good performance. The leader discusses with his
followers the requirements and conditions for the performance beforehand. The
followers are rewarded financially if the conditions and requirements are met and
corrective action is taken if there are notable deviations. Transformational leadership
on the other hand seems like a more sensible and evolved version of leadership.
Bernard Bass, another celebrated author in the field of leadership expanded further
on the work of Burns. He differs on Burns’ thinking though, and believes that
transactional and transformational leadership are at opposite ends of the leadership
spectrum. Bass suggests that transformational leadership complements transactional
leadership behaviour (Humphreys & Walter, 2003).
Bass proposed four factors that described transformational leadership behaviour more
precisely. Also called the 4Is of transformational leadership, these are: - Idealized
Influence, Inspirational Motivation, Intellectual Stimulation and Individual
Consideration (Humphreys & Walter, 2003; Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991).
Idealized Influence- Transformational leaders are charismatic and have a great
amount of influence over their followers. They gain the respect and trust of their
followers by acting morally and by providing vision and a sense of mission. They are
high on ethics and morals, lead from the front, and achieve the desired results.
Transformational leaders serve as role models to their followers and are often
emulated by them. Bruce Avolio et al., in their article, ‘The 4 I’s of Transformational
13
leadership describe this very well - “The leader who convinces his or her followers that
by achieving their full potential, all concerned will benefit, is the type of leader we have
described as transformational” (Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino, Pg15, 1991; Bass B. ,
1991 Humphreys & Walter, 2003; Bass & Reggio, 2006; Northouse, 2013; Bass B. M.,
1995).
Inspirational Motivation- Transformational leaders ensure that there is a high level of
enthusiasm and optimism at the workplace. They communicate high expectations and
express the purposes of the company in simple ways. They use symbols and pep talks
to help focus the efforts of the employees. The employees are provided with
meaningful and challenging work to inspire and motivate them. Transformational
leaders, in this way, motivate their followers to accomplish more than what is expected
of them (Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991; Bass B. , 1991; Bass & Reggio, 2006;
Humphreys & Walter, 2003).
Intellectual Stimulation- Transformational leaders stimulate the thinking of their
followers by encouraging them to think logically and work out sensible solutions to
everyday problems. The followers are given the creative freedom to challenge existing
values and beliefs of the leader and the organisation. There is the promotion of
intelligence, rationality and careful problem solving. The followers are encouraged to
provide their inputs in every situation and these are taken account of. In this way there
is two-way intellectual stimulation. This approach is especially advantageous and
helpful if the leader doesn’t have too much experience or information in a particular
area. This can also have an incredibly motivating effect on the employees and can
create a general atmosphere of positivity (Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991; Bass
B. , 1991).
Individual Consideration- Transformational leaders realise that each follower has
different needs. They recognise individual differences and personalise their
interactions with them accordingly. They treat each employee individually and giving
them personal attention when required. Tasks are delegated to individuals in an effort
to develop their potential. They are also supported in completing these tasks if they
run into problems. Transformational leaders take on a mentoring role ensuring all
round development of their followers (Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991; Bass B. ,
1991; Northouse, 2013).
Measurement of Transformational Leadership
Transformational Leadership is measured using the Multifactor Leadership
Questionnaire. This questionnaire was developed by Bernard Bass, and measures the
four factors of Transformational Leadership in leaders. This questionnaire also
measures transactional leadership and hence has been used by researchers to
measure or investigate the leadership styles of leaders, both male and female, as an
14
instrument of comparison of leadership styles. It is considered the best instrument for
the measurement of Transformational and Transactional leadership (Ozaralli, 2003).
The questionnaire can be filled up by the leaders’ subordinates, peers, superiors, or
even the leaders themselves. It has been modified several times and has been used
by researchers widely (Hartog, Muijen, & Koopman, 1997).
The Effectiveness/Implications of Transformational Leadership
Transformational leadership can influence individuals enough for them to produce and
demonstrate effort, commitment and performance beyond what can normally be
expected of them. Individuals may take on additional tasks that don’t necessarily fall
within their job description. Innovation and creativity can be expected to become the
norm in the organisation, as a result of creative freedom being awarded to them. This
leads to followers becoming self-motivated or intrinsically motivated and their
dependence on external sources of motivation becomes less. Followers become
interested in self-development and show greater commitment to their job, their co-
workers and the organisation as a whole. This, for leaders means that they need not
spend as much time leading followers. The leader therefore, by practicing
transformational leadership, creates followers who are fully capable of handling
challenges at work on their own. Ultimately this leads to the followers becoming
transformational themselves. The process is best described as leaders creating and
developing leaders (Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991).
Transformational leadership has also been found to be positively related to individual
follower performance across all kinds of job performance criteria. It has also been
found to be positively related to task performance, creative performance and job
performance in general. The relationship holds true for individual, team and
organisational performance, regardless of the level of leadership, type of organisation
and geographic location (Wang, Oh, Courtright, & Colbert, 2011). An organisation with
transformational leaders could also be more attractive to prospective employees and
have positive implications for the corporate image of the organisation as a whole
according to Bernard Bass (Bass B. , 1991).
Transformational leadership has also been found to be positively related to the
performance appraisal ratings given by superiors, a key factor in career advancement
(Carless, 1998). Researchers Jung, Chow and Wu also found a positive relationship
between transformational leadership and organisational innovation and empowerment
(Jung, Chow, & Wu, 2003). Transformational leadership has also been found to have
a positive effect of creativity in an organisation, as found in a study conducted in 43
micro and small Turkish firms involving 163 research and development personnel and
managers.
15
The leadership style debate
To set the whole debate of whether women exhibit more of a transformational style of
leadership than men or whether transformational leadership is feminine in nature, in
context, it is important to see if there are differences in the way men and women lead
in general. From there, specific leadership behaviours that stand out in the case of
both male and female leaders will be extracted. The focus will be on women leaders
throughout.
There has been a lot of debate around this topic, with both sets of researchers, those
who believe women lead differently and are more transformational than men and those
who believe that there aren’t any differences in leadership style, defending their
positions vehemently with research evidence to support their claims. There is literature
where the focus is on merely comparing men and women in the way they lead, without
a focus on transformational leadership. Then there are articles that compare the way
women lead to the transformational style of leadership explicitly. This literature review
is therefore divided into three parts or sections. The first section is an analysis of
literature that compares the leadership styles of men and women. The second section
is an analysis of literature that compares the leadership styles of men and women with
the transformational style of leadership. The third section presents an analysis of the
critical viewpoints.
- Differences in leadership styles of men and women – literature comparing the
leadership styles of men and women
- Literature comparing the leadership styles of men and women, with the
transformational style of leadership
- Critical viewpoints
Differences in leadership styles of men and women - literature comparing the
leadership styles of men and women
Based on interviews/self-assessments
One of the first authors to talk about leadership styles and to compare the leadership
styles of men and women, with a focus on women, was Judy Rosener. This article
arguably started this entire debate about leadership styles and their comparison with
transformational leadership. Rosener carried out a survey that was sponsored by the
International Women’s Forum, in an effort to investigate the differences in the way
men and women lead, if there were any (Rosener, 1990). There was a comparison of
16
leadership performance, style and the kind of influence leaders have on the people
around them at work. Rosener had discussions with a few women leaders, asking
them about their style of leadership. The leaders spoke about how they encouraged
the participation of the employees in managerial decision making. They spoke of two-
way communication being the norm at their workplace with there being free flow of
information between the leader and her subordinates. The leaders talked about the
importance of idea exchange, with one leader talking about how she seeks the ideas
of her employees when she faces challenging situations. There was talk about the
importance of appreciating employees when they perform well and about recognising
work well done with a conscious aversion of behaviour that makes the power distance
between them and their employees apparent. The leaders spoke of how they made
an effort to make sure there was a good level of enthusiasm at the workplace. They
believed that what the employees want is credibility and an opportunity to truly
contribute to the organisation and grow. Notably, the women leaders said this
leadership style came naturally to them, which could be taken as an indication that it’s
a feminine trait. Based on these responses, Rosener described the style of leadership
followed by women as ‘Interactive leadership” (Rosener, 1990). To extract behaviours
that are similar to the factors of transformational leadership from this, there is the
practice of inspirational motivation and individual consideration here. Rosener also
speaks of how men described leadership as an exchange process, equating it with
transactional leadership, but there is no expansion of what they said precisely, while
there was an expansion of what women said. That this study was sponsored by the
International Women’s Forum, unfortunately makes this study a little less believable.
If the study had shown men to be better leaders, it would have been embarrassing for
the author. Also, to talk of methodology, discussions with the leaders themselves
about their leadership styles, reduces the credibility of the findings to a certain extent.
It is surprising therefore that this study is cited so often when the methodology used
to carry out this study is unconvincing.
Kevin Groves carried out a study to investigate the gender differences in social and
emotional skills. In this study 108 leaders, both male and female from various
organisations were rated on their social and emotional skills (Groves, 2005). Women
had a higher rating than men on both these skills. Such skills are closely associated
with charismatic leadership it was found, which is an important component of
transformational leadership. The study was carried out using a self-assessment
instrument, but to limit inflated assessments certain steps were taken.
An interview based study was conducted by Stanford, Oates, and Flores to investigate
the leadership styles of women leaders (Stanford, Oates, & Flores, 1995). 12 women
managers and business owners were interviewed with the help of a detailed
questionnaire. The questionnaire was framed to elicit qualitative and narrative
responses. The primary theme of the findings was employee participation in decision
making for team-based management. The study revealed women leaders as team
building leaders, who seldom gave orders or used coercive power. The leaders spoke
17
about how they effectively communicate with their employees, involving them in open
discussions where the situation demanded (Stanford, Oates, & Flores, 1995). This can
act as a catalyst to motivate employees to work towards achieving the missions of the
corporation. It was clear that the managers were keen on fostering mutual trust and
respect with the employees. The authors do point out that the sample size was small,
marking that as a drawback. If a few employees were asked the same questions about
their manager the study would have been more convincing.
To bring these studies and the findings of the studies together, it is important to extract
the common themes. These studies found that women believe in employee
participation in decision making. The focus seems to be on interaction and team
building. Women leaders encourage their employees to participate in the decision
making process, involving them in discussions where necessary. They also were
found to avoid behaviours that can make the power distance between them obvious.
These studies put together show that women believe in leading in a democratic
manner. The main drawback here is that these findings are based on interviews, with
leaders talking about themselves, and this decreases the weightage of the findings to
a certain extent. The other drawback is that the sample sizes are small. These results
therefore cannot be given much importance but at the same time cannot be struck off
altogether.
Based on literature reviews
In 2008, McKinsey and company conducted a study on the leadership behaviours of
men and women, with a particular focus on women. They first came up with a range
of leadership behaviours that can have a positive effect on organisational performance.
The subjects were then tested in the extent to which they display these behaviours.
Women were found to be more focused on people management than men. They were
found to demonstrate role model behaviour and inspirational behaviour more often.
Decision making was more participative in the case of women leaders. Men, on the
other hand were found to display ‘control and corrective action’ and ‘individualistic
decision making’ more frequently (McKinsey, 2008). While a focus on people
management, employee participation in decisions, role model behaviour and
inspirational behaviour are all closely associated with transformational leadership,
‘control and corrective action’ and ‘individual decision making’ displayed by men, are
not. This study was done by putting together various studies carried out by other
people. One can’t therefore find any issue with the methodology. Having said that, this
was a study, the results of which were discussed by women’s affairs ministers at the
commonwealth secretariat. So the study in a way had to sound positive for women
and women leaders. The possibility of bias, in the way the studies were analysed and
how they decided on including or excluding studies therefore cannot be ruled out.
18
In their article ‘The Leadership Styles of Men and Women’, Eagly and Johannesen-
Schmidt talk about agentic and communal attributes ascribing them to men and
women respectively (Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). Agentic attributes, in
employment settings, can make one speak assertively, compete for attention,
influence others, initiate activity in order to assign tasks to employees, and also give
suggestions in order to solve issues at work. Communal attributes on the other hand,
according to Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt, are ascribed more strongly to women.
People with communal attributes at workplaces tend to speak tentatively, stay away
from the spotlight, take the suggestions of others openly, support others when needed
and focus more on solving interpersonal and relational problems (Eagly &
Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). The authors claim that although the leadership role
occupied by the person has an influence on behaviour, the natural tendencies
occurring due to the sex of the individual still come through, thus resulting in a slight
difference in their style of functioning. There is the simultaneous influence of the
gender role and the leadership role, with the gender characteristics coming through to
a certain extent (Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). The article also brings together
research carried out by other authors, in the process finding specific differences in the
leadership styles of men and women. Women were found to be generally more
interpersonally oriented, while men had more of a task focus. Along the same lines,
women also seemed to exhibit a more democratic style of functioning while men
seemed to follow a more autocratic style. That these findings were based on laboratory
experiments, and assessments carried out on employees who were not in actual
leadership positions is the drawback here.
Appelbaum, Audet and Miller explored this whole area of women leadership, by
studying various schools of thought on this subject. They identified, by bringing
together various studies, differences in the way women and men approach leadership
(Appelbaum, Audet, & Miller, 2003). They found that men are more concerned with
structure, follow a transactional style of leadership, lead in an autocratic manner, give
instructions and are business-oriented. On the other hand women were seen to be
more considerate, participative, socio-expressive and people-oriented, following a
more transformational style of leadership. They also explain how attributes or
characteristics such as ‘good communication skills’, advanced intermediary skills for
negotiation and conflict resolution, interpersonal skills, and a soft approach to handling
people are essentially feminine. Women supposedly demonstrate more concern for
people and their needs and provide employees with a greater amount of support. All
in all this study of literature and extant theories found clear differences in the way men
and women lead, with women demonstrating a more democratic style of leadership
(Appelbaum, Audet, & Miller, 2003). Importantly, this article, while coming up with
these findings doesn’t claim that this seemingly transformational style of leadership is
the ‘exclusive domain of women’ and acknowledges that this style can also be
practiced by men.
19
Gary Powell authored an article titled ‘The gender and leadership wars’, in which he
reviewed extant literature, streams of thought and perspectives about this entire
debate on men and women and their leadership styles (Powell, 2011). He then came
to the conclusion that there are differences in the way women and men lead with
women leading in a more transformational way in comparison to men. Importantly, he
also points out that although this is the case, the organizational setting, the specific
role to be played, and the managerial level do seem to have moderating effects.
Cheryl de la rey wrote an article delving into the views people have on gender and
leadership. Some people argue that there aren’t any noteworthy differences in the
leadership styles of men and women. But the majority view, Cheryl finds, is the view
that there are differences in the way men and women approach leadership (De la rey,
2005). Most researchers have found, through research, that there are differences and
this argument is convincing because there is clear overlapping of feminine attributes
and traits when in leadership positions. Women are seen as being more sensitive to
the needs and aspirations of their subordinates. They are more democratic and
participatory in the way they lead. They are also, according to this perspective, better
at handling conflicts and have better interpersonal skills. They believe in sharing power
and information and lead from behind while encouraging the participation of
employees in decisions (De la rey, 2005).
Clear themes emerge when the findings from each of these studies are put together.
Women clearly seem to be more people oriented in the way they lead when compared
to men. They were found to be more inclined towards encouraging the employees to
participate in the decision making process. They were also found to be better at
communicating with their employees and sensitive to their needs and aspirations. Men
on the other hand were found to be more focused on the task at hand, taking decisions
individually. These are all extensive reviews of extant literature and hence one cannot
find fault with the methodology. These studies can therefore be given more importance
compared to individual studies.
Meta-analyses of studies
Eagly and Johnson conducted a meta-analysis of studies comparing the leadership
styles of men and women. The analysis of literature revealed certain differences in the
way men and women lead. Women seemingly lead in a more democratic manner while
men do so in a comparatively autocratic manner it was found (Eagly & Johnson, 1990).
These findings do carry weightage as the studies were carried out in actual
organisational settings. The meta-analysis also had other findings which were mixed.
While women were found to follow a more interpersonally oriented style of leadership
in laboratory settings and other assessment studies where the subjects were not
actually in leadership positions, in actual organisational settings this wasn’t the case.
In the case of studies carried out in organisational settings with women and men in
20
leadership positions, no differences were found. Women and men here, did not differ
in interpersonally oriented and task oriented styles (Eagly & Johnson, 1990).
Eagly conducted yet another meta-analysis in 1991, this time with Karau (Eagly &
Karau, 1991). The meta-analysis included 54 studies. The focus was to review
research on leader emergence in groups that were initially without a leader. Here again,
while men turned out to more task-oriented, women were found to be more socially
interactive. These studies though were not carried out in organisational settings and
were done so in laboratory settings affecting the weight of the findings to a certain
extent. This is because the pressures associated with organisational settings are
absent here. The findings though cannot be ignored because both men and women
were a part of the study.
Alice Eagly and her colleagues, very recently, carried out a meta-analysis of studies
that assessed and compared the leadership styles of men and women (Eagly A. H.,
2013) and the findings were similar. While there was no specific mention of whether
these were studies carried out in laboratories or organisational settings, one can make
out from the commentary on the findings that these were studies based in actual
organisational settings. They found female leaders to be more democratic and
participative than male leaders. Women were found to be more interpersonally or
communally oriented, while occupying less male-dominated roles. Women were also
found to be better than men at playing the role of a mentor at workplaces. According
to this study, women are in general more concerned about the welfare of people
around them. Corporate boards with a good proportion of women were found to be
more likely to be involved in philanthropic and charitable work. Corporations led by
women or with a high percentage of women in management, were less likely to lay-off
employees during periods of financial stresses. Women leaders in general were also
found to be more concerned about corporate social responsibility, while also being
high on ethics and morals. All this translates to individual concern for employees in
general and role model behaviour, both critical components of transformational
leadership. Men on the other hand were found more likely to adopt a ‘command and
control’ style of leadership (Eagly A. H., 2013).
These meta-analyses also had findings that are similar to the studies analysed so far,
with similar themes emerging. Women leaders were yet again found to be more
democratic, interpersonally oriented, interactive, participative, and generally more
concerned about the wellbeing of their employees. In a more recent study they were
also found to be more inclined towards corporate social responsibility. The main theme
that emerged in the case of men is that they generally lead in a more autocratic manner.
While two of these meta-analyses were carried out in the 90s, one was carried out
very recently, and the findings were still similar. The problem with these studies though
is that the findings are similar if only laboratory based studies are taken into
consideration. In the case of interpersonal orientation, Eagly and Johnson did not find
any differences in actual organisational settings (Eagly & Johnson, 1990). The study
that was carried out with Karau was also based in laboratory settings (Eagly & Karau,
21
1991). Even the study that was more recent included findings from Eagly and
Johnson’s study (Eagly A. H., 2013). Women leaders though were found to lead in a
democratic manner even in organisational studies, so this finding can be given
importance.
In a political setting
While the focus has mainly been on leaders in the business arena, the leadership
styles of global women political leaders were also studied by Nancy Adler, although
this was in the 1990s. Adler’s study was on the leadership styles of some of the leaders
in the political arena in those times, an apparent attempt to try and see if the findings
of Eagly and Johnson holds true for these leaders as well. Eagly and Johnson, found
through their study that women managers are in general more democratic in the way
they lead and manage (Eagly & Johnson, 1990). Adler found that women leaders in
the political arena also lead similarly, taking conscious steps to reduce hierarchy, to
include people in the decision making process and to create unity (Adler, 1996). Just
a few political leaders were covered in this study, especially while extracting these
specific attributes, while the leadership styles of leaders like Margaret Thatcher and
Indira Gandhi were not spoken about specifically, which is curious and reduces the
credibility of the study to a great extent. It would be easy for any other researcher to
study a few male political leaders selectively, keeping the transformational style of
leadership in mind.
Analysis
To sum things up for this section, clear differences have been found in the way men
and women lead. While women have been found to be more democratic and
interpersonally oriented in the way they lead, men have been found to be more
autocratic (Appelbaum, Audet, & Miller, 2003; De la rey, 2005; Eagly & Johnson, 1990).
While this is clear, the link between leading in a democratic and interpersonally
oriented manner and ‘transformational leadership’ is not very clear. To compare this
way of leading with the transformational style of leadership, keeping the four factors
of transformational leadership in mind, is what is needed here perhaps. What does
leading in a democratic and people oriented manner mean? What are the benefits of
being able to communicate well with the employees?
Democratic Leadership- It means that the employees’ opinions are solicited when
decisions are made. This is connected to the intellectual stimulation factor of
transformational leadership. When employees are given an opportunity to give their
feedback on things and present their opinions, and when they can see that their
22
opinions are being taken on board, it can be intellectually stimulating. This can also,
in some cases, be motivating for the employees because they are actually being given
an opportunity to make a direct contribution to the organisation. This is one of the ways
in which an employee can be motivated. In the case of democratic leadership, the
power distance between the employees and the leader is also less comparatively with
the leader being more accessible, and this can also be motivating for the employees
because they feel more connected to the organisation. So democratic leadership is
also linked to the inspirational motivation factor of transformational leadership.
Although when you look at the description of inspirational motivation, there is more
about motivating by articulating a vision for the company and by giving pep talks using
symbols etc. (Avolio, Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991), this is one way to motivate
employees. So although there is a link, just democratic leadership is not enough to
motivate employees.
Democratic leadership therefore is strongly linked to the intellectual stimulation factor
of transformational leadership. It is also linked, to a certain extent, to the inspirational
motivation factor. No link can be seen in the case of the other two factors of
transformational leadership, namely, idealised influence and individual consideration.
People Oriented/Communication Skills- When you are people oriented and have good
relations with your employees, you understand them and their needs and aspirations
better at work. Once that happens, you are automatically inclined towards catering to
those needs because you realise that it will be positive for not just the employee but
also the organisation as a whole. In this way, interpersonal orientation translates into
individual consideration, one of the factors of transformational leadership (Avolio,
Waldman, & Yammarino, 1991), and this link is clear. But in the case of people
orientation this seems like the only link to transformational leadership. In the case of
communication skills on the other hand, there could be a link with the inspirational
motivation factor of transformational leadership. Good communicational skills makes
it easier for leaders to express explicitly, their vision for the organisation. It also
becomes easier to win people over, in the sense, convince the employees that those
plans if put in place can improve things for the organisation. This can only happen if
the leaders first have a clear idea about the future of the organisation though. So
although communication skills can be used to motivate employees, the link is not direct.
In general women were found to lead in a more democratic and people oriented
manner and were also found to have good communication skills in comparison to men
(Appelbaum, Audet, & Miller, 2003; Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001; De la rey,
2005; Eagly & Johnson, 1990; Eagly & Karau, 1991; Eagly A. H., 2013). To put the
benefits of leading in this manner together, democratic leadership could lead to
intellectual stimulation and to a certain extent to inspirational motivation. People
orientation is clearly linked to individual consideration. Good communication skills on
the other hand could be used by leaders to motivate the employees. These findings
could mean women are more individually considerate than men and their natural
leadership style could also be more intellectually stimulating. In the same way they
23
have an advantage over men when it comes to their communication skills, which they
could effectively use to motivate employees. Therefore, based on these findings,
women seem to lead in a more transformational manner. The link is not very clear in
the case of inspirational motivation though, and in the case of idealised influence the
findings are not clear enough to make a judgement. The findings would have been
convincing if the focus was on both male and female leaders equally. These studies
seemed to focus more on female leadership and there isn’t enough written on the way
men lead to make a very clear comparison. But from what we have, women seem to
be more naturally inclined towards the transformational style of leadership, making
transformational leadership seem like a feminine way of leading.
Literature comparing men and women with the transformational style of
leadership
Based on the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire
Bass and Avolio, in 1994 used the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire to study and
compare the leadership styles of men and women managers, explaining and
presenting the results in their article, “Shatter the Glass Ceiling” (Bass & Avolio, 1994).
The Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire is the most widely used instrument
arguably, to measure both Transformational and Transactional leadership (Hartog,
Muijen, & Koopman, 1997). The questionnaire was used to rate top level managers,
both women and men, from 6 fortune 500 organisations. A total of 150 male and 79
female managers were rated by their direct reports. The respondents had to mark their
managers on eighty different items related to their leadership style, while maintaining
their anonymity. When the results were brought together, it was found that the women
managers had higher ratings than their male counterparts on three of the four factors
of transformational leadership. Women were rated higher in the case of idealized
influence, inspirational motivation and individual consideration (Bass & Avolio, 1994).
They also had higher ratings on intellectual stimulation, but the results, the authors
acknowledged, weren’t significant enough to report. Men, on the other hand had higher
ratings on the transactional leadership scale, especially in the case of passive
management-by-exception and laissez faire leadership. Women were rated higher in
the case of contingent reward leadership.
Bass, Avolio and Atwater conducted a comprehensive study to investigate the
transformational and transactional leadership styles of men and women (Bass, Avolio,
& Atwater, 1996). The Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire was used here yet again.
Data was collected using three separate and distinct samples. In each case, both the
respondents and the leaders being tested, were different. Therefore in each case,
24
namely, transformational leadership behaviour, contingent reward behaviour,
management-by-exception and even laissez faire leadership behaviour, the
researcher had results from three distinct samples to show. Women leaders were
rated as more transformational in two out of the three samples, and even in the case
of the third sample, the men and women had equal ratings. So overall, women clearly
had higher ratings in the case of transformational leadership (Bass, Avolio, & Atwater,
1996). In the case of contingent reward leadership and active management-by-
exception the results were mixed. Finally in the case of passive management-by-
exception, women leaders had lower ratings than men, indicating that men displayed
passive management-by-exception that goes against the transformational style of
leadership, more often than women. The methodology in this case was comprehensive
and convincing.
Sarah Burke and Karen Collins conducted research to investigate the style of
functioning of accountants in managerial positions (Burke & Karen, 2001). A modified
version of the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire was used here to measure the
managerial style employed. The managers themselves were asked to fill-up the
questionnaire. Usually the managers’ subordinates, superiors and peers are also
given the same questionnaire to fill-up but this was not done here, with the authors
citing practicality issues. The perceived effectiveness of management skills of the
accountants were also measured by fill-out a certain ‘management skills profile’. The
findings showed that female accountants are more likely to use the transformational
style of leadership in comparison to their male counterparts. This was the case with
all the four factors of transformational leadership (Burke & Karen, 2001). Also, the
female accountants, going by the readings on the management skills profile, perceive
themselves to be more effective than their male counterparts in communicating with
their subordinates and in developing them. They also perceive themselves to be better
at ‘time management’. This research has quite a few limitations though. Firstly, the
Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire, is supposed to be marked by not just the
managers themselves, but also their colleagues. The fact that the questionnaire in this
case was marked only by the managers themselves, makes the findings a little less
convincing. The study was also apparently sponsored by the American Woman’s
Society of Certified Public Accountants, and all the female respondents were members
of this society. If the findings were not in favour of women, it would have been quite
embarrassing for the society, so bias cannot be ruled out.
Vanessa Urch Druskat carried out a study to investigate the differences in the display
of transformational and transactional leadership behaviours by male and female
leaders (Druskat, 1994). The conditions here were different to the studies carried out
so far though. The leaders were priests, sisters and brothers in the Roman Catholic
Church, who can be expected to display behaviours more consistent with the
transformational style of leadership, at least when compared to a traditional setting,
like a for profit competitive organisation. Simple reason being, they aren’t under the
same kind of pressures associated with a traditional organisation where they need to
25
indulge in cost cutting and show increased profits every quarter. The other difference
here, which is again significant, is that there is segregation of women and men. So
there are two different groups. One with just women, and the other with just men. The
Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire was used here. This was a large-scale study
with 6,359 subordinates of leaders responding to the questionnaire. The subordinates
rated whoever they had to directly report to. The findings were interesting, as both
male and female leaders were rated to be exhibiting more transformational leadership
behaviours than those behaviours closer to the transactional style of leadership. In
other words, both male and female leaders were perceived as transformational leaders
by their subordinates. Women leaders though had significantly higher ratings on the
transformational leadership scale (Druskat, 1994). They were rated by their
subordinates, who were also all female, to be exhibiting behaviours consistent with the
transformational style of leadership more often than those behaviours that are
generally associated with the transactional style of leadership. Overall, the female
leaders had higher ratings for their demonstration of transformational leadership
behaviours in comparison the male leaders. This was the case for all the four factors
or four I’s of transformational leadership, namely, inspirational motivation, intellectual
stimulation, idealised influence and individual consideration (Druskat, 1994). The only
limitation here is that this study was conducted in a non-traditional setting, with the
subjects not facing the same kinds of pressures that are associated with a traditional
setting where they would have to show positive results every quarter and where there
would be lesser job security. This was actually pointed out by Gary Powell in his study
on the leadership styles of men and women (Powell, 2011). He spoke of how the
organisational setting, or in other words, the context, plays a moderating role.
Nevertheless, both the men and women were tested or rated under similar conditions
and the sample size was also huge. So the study cannot be counted out or ignored
because of just a single limitation.
To put things together, four studies into the demonstration of transformational
leadership behaviours of male and female managers were analysed here. The Multi -
Factor Leadership Questionnaire, the instrument that is commonly used to measure
transformational leadership behaviours (Hartog, Muijen, & Koopman, 1997), was used
in these studies. In each case, female leaders were found to be more transformational
than their male counterparts. At the same time men were rated higher on the
transactional leadership scale. In the first case, male and female managers from six
fortune 500 companies were rated on the questionnaire. In the second case there
were three distinct samples of male and female leaders from which data was collected.
Then a study was carried out on male and female accountants in managerial positions.
Finally there was a study carried out in a non-traditional setting where the leadership
traits of priests, brothers and sisters from the Roman Catholic Church were studied
using the questionnaire. So these are studies that were carried out in four different
settings and contexts, which makes the findings even more convincing. In fact, women
26
had higher ratings than men on all the four factors of transformational leadership.
When it comes to the methodology of studies even, except in one case, where the
leadership styles of accountants were studied and where the issues were pointed out,
the other studies were convincing. The only issue one could point out here, and which
affects the credibility of the findings to a small extent, is that all of these studies were
carried out more than 13 years back. But in general, to argue for these studies, the
findings in each case were very similar. Also, trends perhaps do not change very
dramatically in one or two decades, because this is to do with gender related
characteristics.
Based on Meta-analyses
A large sample of male and female managers were investigated for transformational
and transactional leadership traits using the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire yet
again, this time by Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt (Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt,
2001). They also included in their study a meta-analysis of 47 studies investigating the
same issue with the same questionnaire. The results yet again showed women
exceeding men on 3 of the 4 factors of transformational leadership, namely, idealised
influence, inspirational motivation and individual consideration. The largest difference
was seen in the case of individual consideration, owing to the communal traits that are
predominant in women (Eagly & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2001). Men on the other hand
were rated higher on the transactional leadership traits of active and passive
management-by-exception and also in the case of laissez-faire leadership.
A study of the same kind was conducted by Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt and Van
Engen. They carried out a meta-analysis of 45 studies this time, comparing male and
female managers on measures of transformational and transactional leadership. The
result was the same again, with the study revealing that women in general are more
transformational than men and men showing transactional leadership qualities (Eagly,
Johannesen-Schmidt, & Van Engen, 2003).
These were both meta-analyses carried out in the early 2000s and both these studies
found women leaders to be more transformational than their male counterparts. Since
these are meta-analyses, more weightage can be given to these findings.
Analysis
Based on the findings of the individual studies that were analysed and also the findings
of the two meta-analyses, female leaders clearly seem to be more transformational
than their male counterparts. The similarity of the findings no matter what the context
is, makes the studies and the findings convincing. There were a few limitations in the
case of the individual studies which were pointed out. In the case of the meta-analyses,
27
how the researchers went about the process of analysing each study and on what
basis they included or rejected each study for the meta-analysis was not studied, and
this is certainly a limitation. What kind of statistical method they used to bring the
studies together was also not analysed, due to a lack of knowledge in that area. Credit
was given to the credentials of the researches in this matter.
Critical viewpoints
Billing and Alvesson produced an article taking a critical view of this whole idea of
feminine leadership. They talk about a “reversal of argumentation” in feminist literature,
which apparently a couple of decades ago argued the case for women saying that
women and men lead in the same way and hence are fit for managerial positions, and
now there are claims that they lead in a distinct and more effective manner, in other
words in a transformational manner, all in an effort to facilitate their rise to top
leadership positions (Billing & Alvesson, 2000). They hold the opinion that female
leadership is an ideal construction of the way women lead, born out of feminist thought,
and claim that there is no clear evidence that shows that most women in leadership
positions actually lead in this manner. Billing and Alvesson believe that this plays on
gender stereotypes and overstates the extent to which skills picked up while managing
a family can be transferred and used effectively in actual workplaces (Billing &
Alvesson, 2000). While they say that there is no evidence that women lead in this
manner, a good amount of evidence has been presented above (Eagly A. H., 2013;
McKinsey, 2008). This is evidence collected through extensive surveys conducted in
different contexts, with the findings being the same in most cases.
After this study, in 2002, Robert Vecchio wrote an article which was a critical review
of the literature that attempts to show that women have an advantage when it comes
to leading. He talks of how such claims that ‘women lead in a certain way that gives
them an advantage’ are overstated and are based on studies using flawed
methodologies (Vecchio R. , 2002). Among the studies that he critiqued was a meta-
analysis that was included here, carried out by Alice Eagly and Blair Johnson (Eagly
& Johnson, 1990). The meta-analysis apparently included studies that were not even
published and dissertations, which are basically studies carried out by novices,
although Eagly and Carli did get back on this point explaining how methodologists
actually recommend the inclusion of such studies, unless there are glaring flaws in the
way they were carried out (Eagly & Carli, 2003). He also talks about them using leader
self-ratings which cannot be relied upon and questionnaires that have flaws (Vecchio
R. , 2002). Vecchio also had an issue with the way they measured autocratic and
democratic behaviours. Overall he found that the studies when put together and
analysed critically, reveal no differences in the behaviours of leaders. A loophole in
the methodology used by all these studies using questionnaires and surveys, which
28
talk about gender differences and about judging which gender is more transformational
or transactional, is pointed out here. That is, all these studies ignore the length of time
the respondents to these questionnaires have actually spent with their managers.
Vecchio showed through a study, how ratings tend to be stereotypic, and in this case
gender stereotypic, when the duration of contact between the person being rated and
the respondent to the questionnaire is less (Vecchio R. , 2002). This moderator does
not seem to have been accounted for in the studies. To comment on what Vecchio
has said though, absolutely any study based on surveys and questionnaires can have
a lot of moderating factors and it is nearly impossible to account for all of them while
conducting a study given the time constraints. Having said that, the fact that this can
still have an effect which can possibly give rise to gender stereotypic findings, with
women being perceived as being transformational, cannot be ignored.
There is another methodological issue with these meta-analyses and literature reviews
analysed above, based on which female managers have been declared democratic or
transformational, which needs to be pointed out. This issue or moderating factor is not
paid attention to even in the case of the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire. This
is the moderating effect of specific job role or job content. This was pointed in one of
Vecchio’s critiques too (Vecchio R. P., 2003). While Vecchio specifically targeted a
study carried out by Alice Eagly, this could be the case with the other studies as well.
In some specific job roles or job contexts, it could be easier to lead in a democratic
manner and this, if controlled for, could lead to a softening of the findings. If women
were found to be transformational across job roles, the findings would be more
convincing. While Eagly and Carli did counter most of Vecchio’s critiques of their article,
they did not say anything about this specific issue (Eagly & Carli, 2003). Having said
that, it would be very time consuming to account for such moderating factors and there
could be more such factors.
Finally there is the issue of saleability or visibility of articles. Publishing houses or the
media usually sell and highlight studies that have ‘catchy’ results or findings (Vecchio
R. P., 2003). The other studies that do not really produce results that are out of the
ordinary could be ignored. Researchers therefore could be tempted to produce
findings that could catch the attention of the publishing houses. In the case of gender
differences for instance, studies that show no differences in the way men and women
lead might be ignored by most people, the efforts of the researchers not getting enough
recognition. Not to question the integrity of the researchers, but they might even
involuntarily search hard for differences.
While there are such criticisms, they are to do specifically with the comparison of male
and female leaders, and about one set being more or less transformational than the
other. There are no criticisms that stand out when it comes to just the leadership style
of female leaders with them being found to be transformational in general. Most of the
Vecchio’s criticisms have been countered by Eagly and Carli (Eagly & Carli, 2003).
The part where Vecchio talks about publishing bias is at best an accusation. The only
29
point that is debateable is where there is talk about the researcher not accounting for
job role and job content.
Summary Tables
The following tables summarize the findings of the literature review:
Leadership Behaviours of Women and Men
Type of study Women Men Interview Based
Employee Participation in Decision Making/Open Discussions
Effective Two-Way Communication
Low Power Distance
High Social and Emotional Skills Connected to Charismatic Leadership
Team-Based Management
Literature Review Based
Interpersonally-Oriented
Participative Decision Making
Democratic Leadership Sensitive to Employee
Aspirations
Power-Sharing
Task-Oriented
Individualistic Decision Making
Autocratic Leadership
Meta-Analyses
Democratic
Socially Interactive
Participative People-Oriented
Autocratic
Task-Oriented
30
Leadership styles of Women and Men
Examples of women leaders
Five women leaders were selected on the basis of their popularity for this section.
Their leadership styles have been described, analysed critically and then compared
and contrasted with the transformational style of leadership.
Indra Nooyi
Indra Nooyi is the current CEO of PepsiCo, a multi-national company with over
300,000 employees. PepsiCo is said to be the largest food and beverage company in
North America. Nooyi has been with Pepsi for the past seventeen years, gradually
rising through the ranks to become the CEO (Indra Nooyi Leadership Style, 2014) .
She is an influential figure in the corporate world and is currently ranked number 2 in
the ‘most powerful women in business’ list and ranked number 13 in the ‘world’s 100
most powerful women’ list by Forbes magazine (forbes.com, 2014; Leadership
Qualities of Indra Nooyi, 2014).
Indra Nooyi uses the words courage, competence, confidence, compass and
‘communication skills’ when asked to describe her leadership style, with her
communication skills getting a special mention (Indra Nooyi Leadership Style, 2014).
She also believes in ‘relationship building’, sending letters to the parents of employees
as a token of appreciation. Nooyi sets herself a very high moral standard, with PepsiCo
said to be a company that is high on ethics, especially when it comes to employer-
Type of Study Women Men Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire Based
Transformational Leadership
Contingent Reward Leadership
Transactional Leadership
Passive Management-By-Exception
Laissez Faire Leadership
Meta-Analyses Transformational Leadership
Transactional Leadership
31
employee relations. She believes in leading in a democratic manner, allowing
participative discussions and holding open forums, except when decisions need to be
taken urgently (Indra Nooyi Leadership Style, 2014). She is said to chronicle the
following 5 lessons from her experience of leading (Snyder, 2013)-
Balance the short-term and the long-term (Snyder, 2013)- She talks about how leaders
in today’s times think of just the short-term, looking to produce good short-term results.
She feels it is necessary for leaders to strike the right balance between planning for
the short-term and doing so for the long term as well. While getting good results for
the short-term is important for a company, she says it is necessary to put plans in
place while keeping the long-term in mind as well.
Developing public-private partnerships (Snyder, 2013)- Nooyi talks of how it is
important to form partnerships with the public sector as against looking at them as
rivals.
Think global, act local (Snyder, 2013)- She talks of how it is important to connect with
the customers from all countries and cultural backgrounds while leading a multi -
national company and about how this encourages employees to think in a non-
traditional and innovative manner.
Keep an open mind to adapt to changes (Snyder, 2013)- Nooyi points out that it is
important to adapt to changes and to listen to what others have to say, even if it is in
the form of dissent.
Lead with your head and your heart (Snyder, 2013)- It is important to connect with
everyone at work, Nooyi believes, talking of how one must develop emotional
intelligence.
To compare Indra Nooyi’s leadership style with the transformational style of leadership,
it is important to extract the main themes from the entire description.
One theme that gets repeated through the description is, ‘communication’. She talks
of how it is important to communicate with the employees, connect and develop bonds
with them and listen to what they have to say. She also talks about leading in a
democratic manner and holding open forums. When you communicate with the
employees and encourage them to get involved in the decision making process
through their inputs, what you are doing precisely is stimulating their thinking, one of
the four factors of transformational leadership. When you give importance to ethics
and morals, it is nothing but a display of role model behaviour, an important part of
being a transformational leader. Apart from these two factors of transformational
leadership though, there is not much of an indication, at least based on this limited
data, that there is individual consideration on her part or projection of a certain vision
in simple terms. Therefore it is difficult to judge based on this description, whether
Indra Nooyi leads in a particularly transformational manner. That this description here
is majorly Nooyi describing her own style of leadership, it can’t be taken at face value
32
either. That she communicates effectively with her employees, encouraging them to
give their inputs, is the only behavioural trait that clearly falls under transformational
leadership, given the very limited information available. It is therefore difficult to
declare Indra Nooyi a transformational leader.
Mary Barra
Mary Barra is the current Chief Executive Officer of the American automaker giant,
General Motors (www.forbes.com, 2014). She took over the reins from Dan Akerson
on the 15th of January 2014. She is not only the first female executive to lead General
Motors but is also the first woman to ever lead an auto manufacturer. Mary Barra
started her career at General Motors in 1980 as a student at the General Motors
Institute, also called Kettering University, and has since worked her way up the ranks
gradually. She started as an intern at one of their factories before she even turned 20,
and was the Executive Vice President of Global Product Development and Global
Purchasing and Supply Chain at General Motors before being given the opportunity to
head the company. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in electrical engineering
from the General Motors Institute and then later received a fellowship from the same
company to do her Master’s in Business Administration at the Stanford Graduate
School of Business. She is an electrical engineer from their own university, has a
Master’s degree in Business Administration from the Stanford Graduate School of
Business, was the Vice President of Global Human Resources and also headed
product development (investing.businessweek.com, 2014; Muller, 2013; McGregor,
2013; Engelmeier, 2014). She even once worked as an executive assistant to former
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Jack Smith. Plus, she has been with the
company all her life. She has now been with the company for the past 33 years. She
can therefore be expected to know how things work in the company, inside out. She
arguably has all the credentials to be appointed to this position of Chief Executive
Officer.
Her leadership style has been described by Joann Muller from Forbes as ‘open and
inclusive’ based on how she has led thus far in various leadership positions in General
Motors, as this was written before she became the Chief Executive Officer. She is also
said to be good at collaborating with others (Engelmeier, 2014), taking their opinions
while making decisions (Muller, 2013), which is part of being inclusive. She is praised
for her listening skills and is supposedly easy to approach (Engelmeier, 2014). Mary
Barra is also said to have a quiet personality and apparently talks about her team often,
giving them the credit that they deserve. She likes to build a consensus while making
33
decisions, which shows that she is a team player, only taking decisions by herself
when the team struggles to bring it together. There was a demonstration of team
building skills on her part, when she got both the purchasing department and the
product development department of General Motors to start to work together as one
team (Engelmeier, 2014). She is also known to be very methodical in the way she
goes about her work, demonstrating a strong work ethic, which is perhaps an
indication of task orientation as well. This could be a personality trait, but also probably
something that she picked up during all the years she has spent at General Motors,
an arguably masculine work atmosphere. The point that Powell raised about the
organisational setting as a moderating factor comes up here yet again (Powell, 2011).
But she has not let the setting modify the way she functions to a large extent,
demonstrating this by changing things at the company. She apparently also believes
in simplifying things, demonstrating this by simplifying the bureaucratic system and
even the dress code at the company (McGregor, 2013).
Apart from being an inclusive and collaborative leader and a team player, Mary Barra
has an eye for technological innovation (Engelmeier, 2014), which can be expected
from an electrical engineer. She was after all in charge of product development before
she was elevated to her current position (investing.businessweek.com, 2014).
Steven Snyder, who writes on leadership, talks about the leadership style exhibited by
Mary Barra, through the years of her rise at General Motors, where she held various
managerial positions (Snyder, 2014). Yet again here there is a description of her being
collaborative and also a team player. She is described as being humble, giving her
team credit at every opportunity. Snyder describes how the appointment of Mary Barra
as the head of product development helped bring order and efficiency to the
department. When she was appointed to that position, the product development
department was a complete mess, Snyder says. There was apparently no efficiency,
with there being 30 different platforms and the quality of the products was also poor
(Snyder, 2014). Barra then came in and managed to set everything in order, a feat
that was appreciated by the then Chief Executive Officer Dan Akerson who she
ultimately succeeded. Going further back in time, when Barra was the Vice-president
of Global Human Resources at the company, she is said to have removed bureaucratic
hurdles, giving people more accountability and responsibility (Snyder, 2014), which
can again be counted as inclusive leadership.
Mary Barra was also in general appreciated for the way she handled the crisis at
General Motors after she came to power. Safety issues with the cars came to the fore
a few months after she took over the reins, with a few customers even losing their lives
in accidents. She responded to the crisis in a mature and transparent manner, without
trying to shift blame (Athitakis, 2014).
All-in-all there is talk of how Mary Barra is trying to change the way things are run at
General Motors. This is significant as General Motors has apparently always been run
34
in a highly bureaucratic manner. There is talk of how Mary Barra is trying to change
that, with appreciation coming in from Warren Buffet himself (Colvin, 2014).
If one looks at the way Mary Barra leads in her current position as the Chief Executive
Officer at General Motors and the way she has led over the years in various distinct
managerial positions at the company, her style seems to be close to the
transformational style of leadership. If the common themes that run through the
descriptions by various authors and experts on leadership are brought out, it is not too
difficult to see. Her leadership has been described as collaborative, inclusive,
participative, team building etc. You see a repetition of these words when people
describe her. She is said to be humble and easily accessible. She apparently has good
listening skills, taking the opinions of others and building a consensus before taking
decisions. She is also said to be a team player. All this brought together says that she
has very good interpersonal skills and that she is people oriented, which is a part of
being a transformational leader where there is a greater employee focus. It is also
about being individually considerate. When she takes the opinions of others while
making important decisions, expecting them to contribute with their inputs, it is about
intellectual stimulation. That she admitted that the company is totally at fault for the
security issues, ensuring transparency in the whole process of responding to
complaints, is a display of role model behaviour. She has also changed things for the
better wherever she lead. While she was the Vice-President of Global Human
Resources she removed bureaucratic hurdles and gave people more responsibility.
While she was heading product development she brought in more efficiency and
improved the quality of products. She is again bringing positive changes now as the
Chief Executive Officer. Bringing all these together, one can clearly see that Mary
Barra is a truly transformational leader. Having said this there is also a task focus with
the way she leads, with her being described as methodical in the way she functions.
While being task focused has been associated more often with male leadership and
has often been contrasted with people orientation, Mary Barra has shown both these
qualities. Her leadership style can therefore be described as androgynous and at the
same time transformational. This perhaps shows that a leader can be transformational
while still being task focused, which has in general been described as a trait that goes
against the concept of transformational leadership.
35
Anita Roddick
Anita Roddick founded The Body Shop, a cosmetics giant with over 2045 stores,
serving over 77 million customers, with a presence in 51 markets across the globe, as
of 2006 (Roddick, 2006). The company was founded as a small shop that sold
cosmetics made of natural ingredients in the year 1976. This was in a seaside resort
called Brighton, situated in England and the shop sold only 15 products at the time
(Allen, n.d.). The idea for Anita was simply to make products that people would be
willing to pay for (Roddick, 2006). She had a special concern for the environment, was
an active environmental activist, and all her products were environmentally friendly.
This gave her products a special kind of appeal (Anita Roddick - Cosmetics with a
Conscience, 2008). It was perfect timing for Anita to start something like this, because
the public in Europe was becoming more conscious about the environment,
appreciating greener companies and products (Anita Roddick Biography, n.d.;
www.thebodyshop.com, n.d.). She also built a culture of corporate social responsibility
in the company, with its mission statement being ‘To dedicate our business to the
pursuit of social and environmental change’ (www.thebodyshop.com, n.d.).
Anita Roddick, while having a concern for the environment and social issues was also
said to have good leadership qualities from a business point of view. Brandon Gaille,
who writes on leadership, describes her style as androgynous, where she managed
to combine rational thinking with intuition (Gaille, 2013). She apparently had an
unconventional style of leading, wanting to be different and change things radically for
the better. She believed, and also managed to tackle big issues, supposedly social
issues, through business. She cared about the personal growth of her employees,
believing that her employees and people in general look beyond just money when they
work for an organisation (Barber, 2014). When a leader realises that, the employees
start to put in more effort than usual. Anita Roddick also was very good at
communicating with her employees. That she once said “Leadership is
Communication” (Barber, 2014), shows the kind of importance she gave to
communicating with her employees. She apparently believed that communication was
the most important tool for a leader, and was known to speak in an engaging and
inspiring way (Barber, 2014). This is an important part of being a transformational
leader - to be able to communicate very well, giving passionate speeches, inspiring
and motivating the employees in the process. Using the talent she had for effective
36
communication she made an effort and succeeded in bringing positive social change.
She spread awareness about things like animal testing for instance. She, through The
Body Shop, was in general big on social activism, which also got her company a lot of
publicity. So much so that they didn’t have to spend on any ad campaigns (Barber,
2014). It was an absolute win-win. Create awareness and bring about actual social
change and in the process also get free publicity. Anita Roddick is also known to have
contributed to various other social causes throughout her life. She was in a position to
do so and she took the opportunity, staying true to The Body Shop’s mission
statement. In a way her social activism is what led to her success (Anita Roddick -
Cosmetics with a Conscience, 2008). People felt good about being associated with
The Body Shop and about buying their products. The whole thing of focusing so much
on social and especially environmental change was still new during those times when
people started to learn of the Body Shop. She spread awareness about all the damage
that was happening to the environment using her position as a business leader. There
is so much information about the efforts she made to bring about both social and
environmental change that one can write a whole essay on just that. It was more about
that than the business for her. Which is why she was called a social visionary and her
leadership was described as ‘ethical leadership’ (Philpin, 2014). One needs true vision
after all to take a business to such heights from just a small little store in a small town.
David Holmes, a transformational leadership expert whom Anita Roddick would
consult, described her as a charismatic leader, driven on principles, and someone who
always had very big ideas (Philpin, 2014). She even received knighthood for her
services and for what she achieved in her life (www.thebodyshop.com, n.d.). Anita
Roddick did have her critics like arguably all successful people do. The company
apparently uses synthetic colours and non-renewable petrochemicals in their
products. Plus, while they are so openly against animal testing, there is an accusation
that some of the ingredients in their products were tested on animals by other
companies (WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE BODY SHOP?, n.d.). But these critical
accounts are quite unimpressive. For instance, the company allowed ingredients that
were tested on animals before the year 1991. That means these were ingredients that
were already tested on animals and the testing stopped long back. There was one
criticism that stays though. There are reports of her slamming the cosmetics industry
then, calling it ‘exploitation of women’. But then ultimately she sold her company to a
cosmetics giant L’Oreal, for a huge sum of money (Miller, 2007). She also apparently
took part in anti-globalisation protests when her own company being multi-national
was actually part of the globalisation process (Miller, 2007). So she was accused as
being hypocritical, which is not surprising. There is nothing wrong in being business-
minded though. These criticisms therefore do not make Anita Roddick less of a
transformational leader.
To bring everything together, despite her criticisms, Dame Anita Roddick was certainly
a transformational leader. She cared for the personal growth of her employees, and
could communicate very well with them, inspiring them and motivating them in the
37
process. She always wanted to and managed to do a lot for the environment. She also
used her position to tackle social issues. According to David Holmes, an expert on the
concept of transformational leadership, “She was the first person to make social
responsibility part of company culture” (Philpin, 2014). So there was a display of
charismatic and role model behaviour, of individual consideration for her employees,
and of inspirational motivation going by the way she would communicate with her
employees, although there is no direct link between good communication skills and
inspirational motivation.
Sheryl Sandberg
Sheryl Sandberg is currently the Chief Operating Officer of the social networking site
Facebook, which has a market value of 160 billion dollars (Stone M. , 2014;
www.forbes.com, 2014). Even before she joined Facebook, Sheryl has had an
impressive track record. She did her bachelor’s from Harvard University in the field of
economics, after which she joined the World Bank. She then later did her Master’s in
Business Administration from Harvard Business School after which she joined the
United States treasury department as Chief of Staff when the democrats were in power
under Bill Clinton. When the democrats lost power, she shifted base to Silicon Valley
where she worked for Google as Vice-President of Global Online Sales and
Operations. She finally joined Facebook in 2008 as the Chief Operating Officer, where
she has been responsible for overseeing the operations of a number of departments
(investing.businessweek.com, 2014). She is now one of the wealthiest women in
technology with a net worth of over a billion dollars (Stone M. , 2014). She also recently
authored a book called ‘Lean In: Women, Work and the Will to Lead’ which has gone
on to become a bestseller, selling more than a million copies. The book has even
started a movement of sorts – there is now a global community group called
Leanin.org, founded by Sheryl, to change and improve women’s position in workplaces
and to encourage women to chase a successful career (Sheryl Sandberg Biography,
2014).
As far as Sheryl Sandberg’s leadership skills are concerned, she is described as a
team player with good team spirit, which apparently motivated her to write the ‘Lean
In’ book and especially launch the entire lean in movement (Leadership Qualities of
Sheryl Sandberg , 2014). There are online teams or ‘lean in circles’ that she pushed
for the creation of, which give advice, support and encouragement to female
professionals. The women in the groups also discuss issues that they face at work
offering advice to each other. This goes to show the belief that Sheryl has in teams
and the faith that she has in what people can achieve when they work in teams. Even
38
professionally she appreciates the teams she has been part of (Leadership Qualities
of Sheryl Sandberg , 2014). She is also described as compassionate and you can see
this when you look at what she has been doing for women in the workforce through
‘Lean In’ and the community groups that followed. This was also the case when she
was with the World Bank, where she worked for the eradication of leprosy in India
(investing.businessweek.com, 2014). On can expect a leader who is compassionate
in general to have a natural inclination towards being individually considerate towards
her employees at work even. Although this need not necessarily be the case. In line
with this observation, the way Sheryl leads and the form of persuasion she uses to get
things done has been described as ‘soft-power’ (Stone B. , 2011). This probably
explains why a lot of people like her and the way she leads, so much so that some
people followed her from Google to Facebook (Eblin, 2012). She is described to be
warm and friendly and very good at building relationships, inspiring people to work well
in the process (Eblin, 2012). For this you need to able to communicate well with your
employees, which again she is supposedly very good at. There is a certain authentici ty
to the way she leads and the way she communicates (Gallanis, 2013; Sarkar, 2014).
Sheryl has also been described as an ambitious person (Leadership Qualities of
Sheryl Sandberg , 2014), which is almost needless to say if one looks at what she has
achieved in her life. It is difficult to achieve so much without being incredibly ambitious
and without having clear vision of what to accomplish. Apart from what she has
achieved for herself, the whole “Lean In’ movement also shows how ambitious she is,
as she is basically pushing other women also to be more ambitious, mentoring them
and giving talks on the subject of women at workplaces and women leadership at
every opportunity. The kind of contribution she makes in her current job at Facebook
is remarkable going by what people there say about her and the kind of praise people
shower on her. Matt Cohler, a former Facebook executive once said, “She’s truly the
best operating executive I have ever met in my life” (Stone B. , 2011). Jim Breyer, a
Facebook board member said, “I can say very simply I have never seen anyone with
her combination of infectious, enthusiastic spirit combined with extraordinary
intelligence” (Stone B. , 2011). Mark Zuckerberg himself admitted that Facebook would
be incomplete without her (Stone B. , 2011).
To extract the main themes from this description of Sheryl Sandberg’s leadership style,
she definitely has enviable leadership qualities. She has good communication skills
which she uses to connect with and inspire people at work and even otherwise. She
is good at working with teams which comes with having good communication skills.
She has been described as compassionate, good at building relationships, using soft-
power in the way she functions, which can be translated into individual consideration.
She is ambitious and has been very good for Facebook. She authored a best-seller
called ‘Lean-In’, which encourages women to be more ambitious and which started a
movement of sorts which she has led. She thus is a role model for a lot of women.
There are instances of people even following her to Facebook from Google. To put
these together, except for intellectual stimulation and individual, on which there is not
39
much information, she seems to qualify for the other two factors of transformational
leadership, namely, idealised influence and inspirational motivation. In the case of
individual consideration though, there is an indirect link. She has been described as
compassionate and good at building relationships after all. This point is debateable
though. Overall she does seem to have made a huge contribution to Facebook so far,
going by what her peers say about her. This put together shows that Sheryl has some
relevant transformational qualities and can be said to be a reasonably transformational
leader.
Marissa Mayer
Marissa Mayer is currently the Chief Executive Officer of Yahoo, a multi-national
internet corporation. Before being appointed as Chief Executive Officer of Yahoo in
2012, she was with Google for 13 years (Marissa Mayer Biography, 2014). She played
a big hand in making Google what it looks like now, being just the 20 th employee when
she joined it way back in 1999 (Marissa Mayer, 2014). She has a bachelor’s degree in
symbolic systems and a master’s degree in computer science from Stanford University
(Marissa Mayer, 2014). She has received many awards for her accomplishments at
Google and Yahoo and has been appearing on Fortune Magazine’s ‘Most Powerful
Women’ list for the past few years (Marissa Mayer, 2014). When she was offered the
top job at Yahoo in 2012, she was just 37 years old. The stock prices of Yahoo were
on the decline when she came in and there was a lot of pressure on her to turn things
around. She did manage to turn things around for Yahoo, and the company has made
a lot of acquisitions since then. She has managed to restore investor confidence in the
company and the stock prices have risen (Reisinger, 2014).
To talk about Marissa Mayer’s leadership traits, she is described as someone who is
passionate about what she does (Gallo, 2012). It is incredibly important to be
passionate about what one does in order to succeed in it. To become the Chief
Executive Officer of a multi-national organization at the age of just 37 is a remarkable
feat. That she has been appointed to such a position, the passion she has for her field
probably comes through. This shows when one looks at the way she works. When she
was offered the top post she was reportedly heavily pregnant. But she still decided to
take the job taking just two weeks of maternity leave (Meyers, 2013). She is described
as extremely hardworking, having the ability to work 15 hours straight and being
available through email even until 11pm (Yahoo's CEO Marissa Mayer: the Iron Lady,
2013; Gallo, 2012). This kind of passion, commitment and work ethic can inspire and
motivate other employees as well. The same kind of commitment is seen in how she
40
specifically goes about her work as well. She travels around the world to meet wi th her
employees face-to-face (Kurvers, 2013). This builds team spirit among the employees,
making them feel like they are all part of one large family. She is said to have a clear
vision about what she wants to do with Yahoo, and is committed to that vision, with a
focus on innovation (Kurvers, 2013; Dunn, 2013). Marissa is also described as a
persuasive speaker and very good at communicating with her employees. She
apparently gives brilliant presentations, connecting very well with her audience (Gallo,
2012). While Marissa motivates people indirectly by working through the day and
leading by example, she also does so by listening to her employees by letting them
meet her and give their input. Although there is no information on whether she still
does this at Yahoo, while at Google, she would hold sessions where her subordinates
could meet her and give their feedback on things and also talk about their ideas (Gallo,
2012). This can be motivating as well as intellectually stimulating. Marissa seems to
be a leader who is more focused on innovation and improving efficiency than on the
people side of things. Whether this is more suitable for a tech company is debateable
but in the case of a transformational leader the focus is usually more on the
employees. She has taken a few steps which are certainly positive from the innovation
and collaboration point of view but may not be so from the people management point
of view. For instance she banned teleconferencing and working from home, explaining
that working at the workplace and being physically present in meetings would result in
more creativity and collaboration (Meyers, 2013; Dunn, 2013). She believes that
working from home reduces efficiency which may be true. She has demonstrated a
certain amount of consideration for her employees though, for example by granting
longer maternity and paternity leave (Meyers, 2013), but has in general focused more
on increasing efficiency and innovation. Her leadership style has been described as
unconventional (McGregor, 2013). For instance, apart from the changes she has made
in an effort to increase the efficiency and innovating capacity, by banning
teleconferencing and working from home, she has been reportedly personally looking
at the profile of each person Yahoo hires (McGregor, 2013). While this could be an
effort to increase the standards at Yahoo and is commendable, this could also send a
wrong signal that she doesn’t trust her Human Resources team. For a leader it is
important to show trust in their team so they perform to their potential. Then another
decision by Marissa Mayer got her a lot of criticism, especially from a Human
Resources point of view. The decision to introduce ‘stack ranking’ (Dunn, 2013). ‘Stack
Ranking’ is a system of forced ranking where managers are forced to rank the
employees in their team. A few employees are ranked as top performers and a few
need to be ranked at the bottom (Nisen, 2013). The employees at the bottom are then
laid off. So even if everyone performs well, some need to be ranked at the bottom
according to this system. This was introduced at Yahoo by Marissa, despite criticism
of this system. Employees have expressed dissatisfaction as one would expect and
so have some managers. Stack Ranking has also been found to be negatively
correlated to employee engagement and innovation. Surprisingly in the case of Yahoo
though, they have actually made progress. Whatever methods Marissa Mayer has
41
been using to lead has actually turned things around for Yahoo, something that four
Chief Executive Officers before her couldn’t do (Reisinger, 2014). This is on a purely
financial basis. Since she has come to power, Yahoo have acquired businesses and
their stock prices have risen (Reisinger, 2014). This was probably what was needed
for Yahoo for its revival. To sum things up, Marissa Mayer has been a brilliant leader
for Yahoo no matter what her critics say. The results show this. Maybe this kind of
leadership is needed for tech companies. Steve Jobs led in a similar manner and was
great for Apple, needless to say (Auerbach, 2013). But Marissa Mayer certainly is not
a Transformational Leader strictly speaking, going by the description of
Transformational Leadership. She has managed to transform things for Yahoo though.
Out of the five women leaders studied, three turned out to be transformational in the
way they lead. In the case of Indra Nooyi though, the information was quite limited and
hence was not enough to either declare her a transformational leader or otherwise.
So, if her case is counted out, 3 out of 4 leaders did turn out to be reasonably
transformational in the way they lead. The point of this exercise was to see if women
leaders at the highest managerial level, with the kind of pressures they face, also
behave in a transformational manner. The findings therefore can said to be in line with
the findings of the literature review, with women in general having the tendency to lead
in a transformational manner.
Discussion and Conclusion
To discuss the findings of this dissertation and write a proper conclusion, it is important
to go back to the title of the dissertation and the specific research aims and objectives
and see whether the findings specifically answer the questions. The main aim of this
dissertation, which the title suggests, was to find out if Transformational Leadership is
a naturally feminine way of leading and whether it is clear enough to describe to what
extent this is the case. To make this more specific this was broken into research aims.
The first research aim was to just examine the concept of transformational leadership.
This was more like a description of transformational leadership and was not a critical
analysis.
42
The second aim was to study the way women lead through a critical analysis of extant
literature on the topic. This section of the dissertation was titled ‘the leadership style
debate’. The articles on this topic were first split into two parts. There were articles that
compared the leadership behaviours of men and women. These spoke about the
leadership behaviours in the findings without a specific comparison to the
transformational style of leadership. Then there were studies that compared the
leadership styles of men and women directly with the transformational style of
leadership using the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire. These two types of
studies were presented and analysed separately. This is because in the first case the
methodology and findings needed to be analysed and in addition to that the findings,
which were descriptions of behaviours of women leaders, needed to be put together
and compared with transformational leadership. In the second case though, the
studies were about finding out whether men or women are more transformational.
There was therefore a direct comparison with the transformational and transactional
leadership scale. So in this case, just the methodology used by the researchers in
carrying out the study needed to be analysed.
The findings from both these sets of articles can now be put together finally.
Women: Women believe in participatory decision making, encouraging the employees
to give their feedback and opinions while taking important decisions (McKinsey, 2008).
They are also more interpersonally oriented, having the ability to connect with their
employees more easily (Appelbaum, Audet, & Miller, 2003). There is a greater focus
on the employees, when women lead, with avoidance of behaviours that make the
power distance apparent (McKinsey, 2008). They seem more considerate and more
sensitive to the needs and aspirations of their employees. They also are better at
communicating with their employees, which is basically a requirement for being
interpersonally oriented and for expressing the vision for the company. A particular
study also found women leaders to be more concerned with corporate social
responsibility in general and also more concerned with ethics and morals (Eagly A. H.,
2013). To talk about the traits that really stand out, women leaders are democratic in
the way they lead, are good at communicating with their employees, and are also
employee or people oriented which are all closely related with the transformational
style of leadership, making transformational leadership seem like a feminine concept.
Even in the case of studies that rated women and men on the transformational and
transactional leadership scale, women were clearly found to be more transformational,
and had higher ratings on all the four factors of transformational leadership in most
cases (Eagly, Johannesen-Schmidt, & Van Engen, 2003). These findings are based
on ratings on the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire, the instrument that is
commonly used to measure transformational and transactional leadership behaviours.
Men: Men are more focused on the task at hand and on business concerns. They tend
to give out instructions, control things, and are more concerned with structure
(Appelbaum, Audet, & Miller, 2003). They are less people-focused and like taking
decisions independently (Eagly A. H., 2013). To extract the common themes, men
43
lead in a comparatively autocratic manner and have a task orientation. While these
were the findings in nearly every study, it must be pointed out that the focus in most
of these studies was on female leaders and the discussion on male leaders was very
limited. In the case of studies that used the Multi-Factor Leadership Questionnaire,
men were found to operate in a more transactional manner. In every study they had
higher ratings on the transactional leadership scale, especially in the case of passive
management by exception (Bass, Avolio, & Atwater, 1996). The findings therefore can
be said to be very clear and convincing.
All the studies that were analysed were set in very different contexts. The
methodologies ranged from interviews to meta-analyses and literature reviews. While
some studies were set in the early 90s, some others were done as recently as 2008
and 2013. The findings in all these cases were still very similar. All these put together
show clearly that women are more transformational in the way they lead compared to
male leaders and even in general, which shows that transformational leadership is a
feminine way of leading.
There are a couple of factors though, which, if accounted for could lead to a slight
moderation of these findings. The one that stands out is the ‘job role and content’
(Vecchio R. P., 2003). This factor is generally not accounted for or not paid enough
attention to it seemed like, and can have an impact on the findings. It arguably is easier
to be democratic, interpersonally oriented and transformational in a few specific roles.
Also, the specific department and industry should be taken account of. For instance,
leaders could be naturally more transformational in the human resources department,
a department occupied by women more often. It could be difficult to be democratic and
transformational while occupying a managerial position in a technology organization
where there is constant pressure to meet targets and compete. It would help make
things more clear if the distribution of female leaders in job roles and specific industries
even are taken into consideration and highlighted. This is especially a problem in the
case of meta-analyses and literature reviews where findings are just brought together
without paying attention to the specific job roles, departments and industries the
managers are functioning in. The other issue is to do with the publication of studies
and the attention given to studies. Studies that show differences in the way men and
women lead, with women being more transformational, would arguably get the
attention of publishers more easily (Vecchio R. P., 2003) and so researchers could
search hard for such findings.
If these are accounted for, the differences presumably would be a little more moderate
and the findings in general would be more convincing. But giving credit to all the
literature analyses and the meta-analyses, and the overlapping of the findings, women
leaders can be said to be transformational in general.
The second research aim was to study the leadership style of women by analysing
existing literature, with the concept of transformational leadership in mind. Women
44
leaders have been found to lead in a democratic and people oriented manner in
general and have been found to lead in a transformational manner.
The third aim was to look at examples of women leaders in order to study their
leadership styles in comparison to transformational leadership. The leadership styles
of five leaders, who were randomly picked, were studied. While one was counted out
due to lack of sufficient information, 3 out of the other 4 leaders turned out to be
transformational leaders, giving support to the findings of the literature review.
To bring the findings together in order to answer the main research question, women
leaders have been found to be transformational in general. This is on the basis of a
literature review of extant studies on the subject and on the examples studied.
Therefore, transformational leadership does seem to support feminine notions of
leadership. While this can be said to be the case with a reasonable amount of certainty,
it is difficult to judge to what extent transformational leadership supports feminine
notions of leadership on the basis of the studies carried out so far. For this to be
answered, the methodology used by the researchers in carrying out independent
studies, surveys and meta-analyses needs to be fine-tuned to include job role, job
content, department and industry. Leadership qualities can only be judged
convincingly when the pressures associated and the atmosphere the leaders are
functioning in are also taken into consideration. Unless this happens, one cannot shout
from rooftops to say women naturally lead in a transformational manner. Unless this
happens, one cannot be confident about the findings.
To talk about the implications of these findings, this can be used as an argument to
drop the prejudices that people hold against women in general when it comes to their
ability to lead. That it seems like women have a natural ability to lead in a
transformational manner gives them a small advantage. Small, because men can also
learn to adopt their style of leading, to lead in a transformational manner. Moreover,
one cannot be picked or rejected for a leadership role on the basis of one’s gender.
The credentials of the person matters, and nothing else should.
When it comes to recommendations for future research, as was discussed earlier, the
findings would be much more convincing and believable if moderating factors such as
job role and job content of the manager, and the department and industry the manager
is functioning in are taken into consideration. Perfect comparisons cannot be made,
when the work atmosphere and pressures associated are unequal. It would be
interesting if a study is carried out where leaders, both male and female, are studied,
where industry, department and job content are treated as variables. It would be
interesting to see in which job role, department and industry, leaders are more
transformational.
45
Bibliography
(n.d.). Retrieved from www.thebodyshop.com:
http://www.thebodyshop.com/services/aboutus_anita-roddick.aspx
(2014). Retrieved from forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/profile/indra-nooyi/
(2014). Retrieved from investing.businessweek.com:
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=4022179
9&ticker=GM
(2014). Retrieved from www.forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/profile/mary-barra/
(2014). Retrieved from www.forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/profile/sheryl-sandberg/
(2014). Retrieved from investing.businessweek.com:
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/person.asp?personId=2754417
3&ticker=GOOG
Adler, N. (1996). Global Women Political Leaders: An Invisible History, An Increasingly Important
Future. Leadership Quarterly, 133-161.
Allen, S. (n.d.). Anita Roddick - Redefining Business As We Know It. Retrieved from
entreprenuers.about.com:
http://entrepreneurs.about.com/od/famousentrepreneurs/p/anitaroddick.htm
Anita Roddick - Cosmetics with a Conscience. (2008, October 10). Retrieved from
www.entreprenuer.com: http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/197688
Anita Roddick Biography. (n.d.). Retrieved from www.thebiographychannel.co.uk:
http://www.thebiographychannel.co.uk/biographies/anita-roddick.html
Appelbaum, S. H., Audet, L., & Miller, J. C. (2003). Gender and Leadership? Leadership and Gender?
A journey through the landscape of theories . Leadership and Organisation Development
Journal, 43-51.
Athitakis, M. (2014, March 24). Three Lessons from Mary T. Barra's Crisis at GM. Retrieved from
associationsnow.com: http://associationsnow.com/2014/03/three-lessons-from-mary-t-
barras-crisis-at-gm/
46
Auerbach, D. (2013, December 11). The Age of the Product Manager. Retrieved from
www.slate.com:
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2013/12/marissa_mayer_product_mana
ger_a_new_better_kind_of_ceo.html
Avolio, B. J., Waldman, D. A., & Yammarino, F. J. (1991). Leading in the 1990s: The four I's of
Transformational leadership. Journal of European Industrial Training , 9-16.
Babu, G. (2011, May 17). Sheryl Sandberg and Soft Power. Retrieved from georgebabu.com:
http://georgebabu.com/2011/05/17/sheryl-sandberg-soft-power/
Barber, C. (2014, August 28). Anita Roddick's Top 5 Leadership Messages. Retrieved from
vividmethod.com: http://vividmethod.com/anita-roddicks-top-5-leadership-messages/
Bass, B. (1991). From Transactional to Transformational Leadership: Learning to Share The Vision .
Bass, B. M. (1995). Theory of Transformational Leadership Redux. Leadership Quarterly, 463-478.
Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. (1994). Shatter the Glass Ceiling; Women May Make Better Managers.
Human Resource Management, 549-560.
Bass, B. M., Avolio, B. J., & Atwater, L. (1996). The Transformational and Transactional Leadership
and Men and Women. Applied Psychology, 5-34.
Bass, B., & Reggio, R. (2006). Transformational Leadership. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Burke, S., & Karen, C. M. (2001). Gender Differnces in Leadership Styles and Management Skills.
Women in Management Review, 244-256.
Carless, S. A. (1998). Gender Differences in Transformational Leadership: An Examination of
Superior, Leader and Subordinate Perspectives. Sex Roles.
Carlson, N. (2012, July 17). The Truth About Marissa Mayer: She Has Two Contrasting Reputations .
Retrieved from www.businessinsider.com: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-truth-
about-marissa-mayer-she-has-two-contrasting-reputations-2012-7?IR=T
Chapman, B. J. (1975). Comparison of Male and Female Leadership Styles. Academy of Management
Journal, 645-650.
Colvin, G. (2014, September 18). Mary Barra's (unexpected) opportunity. Retrieved from
fortune.com: http://fortune.com/2014/09/18/mary-barra-general-motors/
De la rey, C. (2005). Gender, Women and Leadership. Agenda.
Druskat, V. U. (1994). Gender and Leadership Style: Transformational and Transactional Leadership
in the Roman Catholic Church. Leadership Quarterly, 99-119.
Dunn, K. (2013, November 21). Marissa Mayer's Vision for Innovation Appears to Be Elimination .
Retrieved from www.workforce.com: http://www.workforce.com/articles/20077-marissa-
mayers-vision-for-innovation-appears-to-be-elimination
47
Eagly, A. A., & Carli, L. L. (2008). Women and the Labyrinth of Leadership. Harvard Business Review.
Eagly, A. A., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and Leadership Style: A meta-analysis. Psychological
Bulletin, 233-256.
Eagly, A. H. (2013). Women as Leaders: Leadership Style Versus Leaders' Values and Attitudes.
Eagly, A. H., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2001). The Leadership Styles of Women and Men. Journal
of Social Issues, 781-797.
Eagly, A., & Karau, S. J. (1991). Gender and emergence of leaders: A meta-analysis. American
Psychological Association, 685-710.
Eagly, A., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & Van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional,
and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing men and women. American
Psychological Association, 569-591.
Eblin, S. (2012, February 10). Wondering 'Am I a Good Leader'? Take the Sheryl Sandberg Test.
Retrieved from www.businessmanagementdaily.com:
http://www.businessmanagementdaily.com/30044/wondering-am-i-a-good-leader-take-
the-sheryl-sandberg-test
Engelmeier, S. (2014, January 22). Did Mary Barra's Inclusive Leadership Style Propel Her to The Top .
Retrieved from www.industryweek.com: http://www.industryweek.com/companies-amp-
executives/did-mary-barra-s-inclusive-leadership-style-propel-her-top?page=1
Gaille, B. (2013, October 12). Anita Roddick's Leadership Style, Founder of The Body Shop . Retrieved
from brandongaille.com: http://brandongaille.com/anita-roddicks-leadership-style-founder-
the-body-shop/
Gallanis, B. (2013, March 16). Sheryl Sandberg's Four Lessons in Savvy Communication . Retrieved
from bessgallanis.wordpress.com: http://bessgallanis.wordpress.com/2013/08/19/lean-in-
sheryl-sandberg-communication-style/
Gallo, C. (2012, July 17). Google's Marissa Mayer: 3 Leadership Traits She'll Bring to Yahoo . Retrieved
from www.forbes.com: http://www.forbes.com/sites/carminegallo/2012/07/17/googles-
marissa-mayer-3-leadership-traits-shell-bring-to-yahoo/
Groves, K. (2005). Gender Differnces in Social and Emotional Skills and Charismatic Leadership.
Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies.
Hartog, D. N., Muijen, J., & Koopman, P. (1997). Transactional versus transformational Leadership:
An analysis of the MLQ . Journal of Occupational and OIrganizational Psychology, 19-34.
Humphreys, J. H., & Walter, E. O. (2003). Nothing new under the sun: transformational leadership
from a historical perspective. Emerald Insight, 85-95.
Indra Nooyi Leadership Style. (2014, July 31st). Retrieved from www.adviseamrica.com:
http://www.adviseamerica.com/indra-nooyi-leadership-style/
48
Jung, D. I., Chow, C., & Wu, A. (2003). The role of transformational leadership in enhancing
organizational innovation: Hypotheses and some preliminary findings. The Leadership
Quarterly, 525-544.
Kark, R. (2003). The transformational leader: who is s(he)? A feminist perspective.
Kurvers, J. (2013, November 20). How to Be a Better Leader. Retrieved from blog.creativegroup.com:
http://blog.creativegroup.com/how-to-be-a-better-leader-marissa-mayer-dreamforce-2013
Leadership Qualities of Indra Nooyi. (2014, March 12th). Retrieved from
www.centerforworklife.com : http://www.centerforworklife.com/leadership-qualities-indra-
nooyi/
Leadership Qualities of Sheryl Sandberg . (2014, March 26). Retrieved from
www.centerforworklife.com: http://www.centerforworklife.com/leadership-qualities-sheryl-
sandberg-2/
Marissa Mayer. (2014). Retrieved from www.crunchbase.com:
http://www.crunchbase.com/person/marissa-mayer
Marissa Mayer Biography. (2014). Retrieved from www.biography.com:
http://www.biography.com/people/marissa-mayer-20902689#synopsis
McGregor, J. (2013, March 12). Marissa Mayer's unorthodox leadership at Yahoo. Retrieved from
www.washingtonpost.com: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-
leadership/marissa-mayers-unorthodox-leadership-at-yahoo/2013/03/12/0cdcf58e-8b3c-
11e2-9f54-f3fdd70acad2_story.html
McGregor, J. (2013, December 10). The rundown on Mary Barra, first female CEO of General Motors.
Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-
leadership/wp/2013/12/10/the-rundown-on-mary-barra-first-female-ceo-of-general-
motors/
McKinsey. (2008). Women Matter 2: Female leadership, a competitive edge for the future.
Meyers, K. (2013). Leadership Develpment: 5 Lessons Marissa Mayer Can Teach You About Business
Leadership. Retrieved from www.womeninleadership.com:
http://www.womaninleadership.com/2013/12/5-lessons-marissa-mayer-can-teach-you-
about-business-leadership-ken-myers.html
Muller, J. (2013, December 16). How Mary Barra Will Lead GM. Retrieved from www.forbes.com:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmuller/2013/12/16/how-mary-barra-will-lead-gm/
Nisen, M. (2013, November 15). Why Stack Ranking Is A Terrible Way To Motivate Employees.
Retrieved from www.businessinsider.in: http://www.businessinsider.in/Why-Stack-Ranking-
Is-A-Terrible-Way-To-Motivate-Employees/articleshow/25840360.cms
Northouse, P. G. (2013). Leadership (Theory and Practice).
49
Philpin, B. (2014, June 22). Women in Leadership: Anita Roddick. Retrieved from www.predictive-
advantage.com: http://www.predictive-advantage.com/women-leadership-anita-roddick/
Powell, G. (2011). The gender and leadership wars. Organizational Dynamics.
Reisinger, D. (2014, January 9). Marissa Mayer's Leadership: 10 Ways She's Restoring Yahoo's
Fortunes. Retrieved from www.eweek.com:
http://www.eweek.com/cloud/slideshows/marissa-mayers-leadership-10-ways-shes-
restoring-yahoos-fortunes.html
Roddick, A. (2006). Retrieved from anitaroddick.com: http://www.anitaroddick.com/aboutanita.php
Rosener, J. B. (1990). Ways Women Lead. Harvard Business Review.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New
Directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 56.
Sarkar, P. (2014, January 7). 5 Leadership Lessons From Sheryl Sandberg. Retrieved from
www.mensxp.com: http://www.mensxp.com/work-life/leadership/21485-5-leadership-
lessons-from-sheryl-sandberg.html
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research Methods for Business. Prentice Hall .
Sheryl Sandberg Biography. (2014). Retrieved from www.biography.com:
http://www.biography.com/people/sheryl-sandberg
Snyder, S. (2013, May 7th). Leadership Lessons from PepsiCo CEO, Indra Nooyi. Retrieved from
www.snyderleadership.com: http://snyderleadership.com/2013/05/07/leadership-lessons-
from-pepsico-ceo-indra-nooyi/
Snyder, S. (2014, January 15). Five Leadership Lessons from General Motors CEO, Mary Barra .
Retrieved from snyderleadership.com: http://snyderleadership.com/2014/01/15/five -
leadership-lessons-from-general-motors-ceo-mary-barra/
Stacie, F. A., & Reeves, M. (2008). Queens of the hill: Creative destruction and the emergence of
executive leadership of women. The Leadership Quarterly, 372-384.
Stanford, J. H., Oates, B. R., & Flores, D. (1995). Women's leadership styles: a heuristic analysis.
Women in Management Review, 9-16.
Stone, B. (2011, May 12). Why Facebook Needs Sheryl Sandberg. Retrieved from
www.businessweek.com:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_21/b4229050473695.htm?chan=rss_
topStories_ssi_5#p2
Stone, M. (2014, July 30). The Fabulous Life of Facebook Billionaire Sheryl Sandberg . Retrieved from
www.businessinsider.in: http://www.businessinsider.in/the-fabulous-life-of-facebook-
billionaire-sheryl-sandberg/articleshow/39263467.cms
Vecchio, R. P. (2003). In search of gender advantage. The Leadership Quarterly, 835-850.
50
Wajcman, J. (1996). Desperately Seeking Differences: Is Management Style Gendered? . British
Journal of Industrial Relations, 333-349.
Wang, G., Oh, I.-S., Courtright, S. H., & Colbert, A. (2011). Transformational Leadership and
Performance Across Criteria and Levels: A Meta-Analytic Review of 25 Years of Research.
Group and Organization Management, 223-270.
Yahoo's CEO Marissa Mayer: the Iron Lady. (2013). Retrieved from sites.psu.edu:
http://sites.psu.edu/leadership/2013/06/29/yahoos-ceo-marissa-mayer-the-iron-lady/
51
52
53
top related