Ethnic, Gender and Class Intersections in British Women’s Leadership Experiences

Ethnic, Gender and Class Intersections in British Women’s

Leadership Experiences

2

Abstract

A qualitative study was conducted to examine how gender

and ethnicity influenced leadership experiences of a mixed

ethnic sample of British women. An intersectional framework

was used which viewed that socio-demographic identities should

be considered simultaneously, to challenge universalist,

gender and ethnic neutral assumptions of leadership. One

hundred and thirty women of White, Black, Asian and mixed

ethnicity in senior management and leadership positions from a

broad range of sectors participated in focus groups and

interviews exploring leadership constructions and enactment.

White women’s leadership definitions reflected contemporary

leadership models. In contrast, minority ethnic women defined

leadership using predominantly ethno-cultural lenses, which

informed their self-identities and orientation towards others.

Regarding enacting leader identities, White women described

historical gender and class barriers to enacting leadership,

while minority ethnic women described current barriers linked

to ethnic and religious identities. Practical implications for

women’s leader identity development and theoretical

3

implications for developing more inclusive leadership theories

are discussed.

Key words: intersectionality, leadership, qualitative, gender,

ethnicity, identity

4

Ethnic, Gender and Class Intersections in British Women’s

Leadership Experiences

Work organisations are microcosms of the societies within

which they are embedded, and “work cannot be understood

outside the context of the socio-cultural arena in which it is

enacted” (Dombeck, 2003, p.352). Institutional dynamics across

economic sectors, both public and private, often mirror

societies’ structures, beliefs and tensions, including

differential outcomes for individuals based on (but not

limited to) membership of gender, racio-ethnic, or

classcategories (Braverman 1974, Acker 1990, Brown et al

2003). Thus, organisational hierarchies are considered

‘gendered’, ‘racialised’ and ‘classed’ (Acker, 2006). This is

particularly so at higher hierarchical levels. Women and in

particular women of colour face a ‘glass ceiling’ in higher

education; “the overwhelming profile of the American college

president remains that of a fifty-something, married, White

male” (American Council of Education, 2000; cited in Thomas,

2005, p. 152). The power elite across corporate, legislative

and military domains in the United States (US) is still made

5

up predominantly of White heterosexual men (Chin, 2010, Thomas

2005).

The pattern seen in the US is replicated in the United

Kingdom (UK).Of the largest 100 corporations (those listed in

the Financial Times and Stock Exchange, the ‘FTSE 100’), the

percentage of female-held board directorships is 17.3% (Sealy

&Vinnicombe, 2013). The figures are less reliable for minority

ethnic directors; one estimate is that 4.1% of UK FTSE 100

directors are from minority ethnic groups (Government

Equalities Unit and Confederation of British Industry, 2010).

However, reportedly, only about half of these individuals are

British nationals. The figures are not as consistently

maintained for minority ethic directors; a recent estimate

indicates that 4.7% of UK FTSE 100 directors are from minority

ethnic groups, about half of whom are non-British (Sealy,

Vinncombe & Singh, 2008.

The pattern of low representation of people from ethnic

minorities at senior levels of company boards is also seen in

UK higher education. Analysis of the staff record from the

Higher Education Statistics Agency shows that very few Black

and minority ethnic staff were in higher senior contract

6

levels above professor level in UK higher education

institutions in 2012/13. In the same period, only 2.6% of

deputy/pro vice chancellors were from Black and minority

ethnic minority groups. In terms of the most senior position,

that of Vice Chancellor (VC), there were not even enough VCs

from minority ethnic backgrounds to be included in the

official statistics (Equality Challenge Unit 2014).Thus, in

the US and the UK, across sectors, leadership and power are

wielded by a homogeneous gender and racial group.

In light of these disparities, our aim is to provide

insight into factors enabling leadership for diversity

(Coleman, 2012).This qualitative study investigates leadership

by focusing on the experiences of 130 British women of colour

and those who identify as White.. Our sample comprised of 110

African, African-Caribbean and South Asian women and20 White

women. We also utilise an intersectional framework, which

highlights the significance of simultaneous consideration of

multiple identities for understanding individuals’

experiences. The study contributes to understanding leadership

as experienced by under-examined groups. The findings

demonstrate how gender, ethnicity, religion and class

7

differentially influence majority and minority ethnic women’s

leadership constructions, self-definitions and enactment. The

findings also offer insight into alternative forms of

leadership that may be useful for guiding and developing

today’s diverse organisational and educational institutions.

Leadership and Diversity

Leadership has a long history in management and, more

recently educational research. Originally, leadership

research focused on the ‘who’ of leadership, seeking to distil

the personality traits that separated leaders from non-leaders

(e.g. Stogdill, 1948). Early models were based on research

conducted in business, military and government settings, and

the White men who led these institutions (Middlehurst, 2008).

Traditionally, leadership theory thus suppressed and

neutralised ‘difference’, including considerations of how

gender and race/ethnic dimensions may impact leadership

(Parker, 2005). Leadership stereotypes tend to be linked to

White, male, heterosexual, middle class attributes (Coleman,

2012). These criticisms remain true of much contemporary

leadership theory.

8

Leadership theorising has generally shifted from

individual to relational dimensions. Approaches like

distributed leadership (Gronn, 2002) and transformational

leadership (Dvir, Eden, Avolio, & Shamir, 2002), emphasise the

significance of engagement and leaders’ impact on followers.

Despite this shift, researchers have tended to minimise how

such relationships may be influenced by social identity and

status inequality. Scholars (e.g. Ayman & Korabik, 2010; Chin

2010) have argued for closer integration between leadership

research and diversity, challenging assumptions that

leadership is gender and culture neutral. In actuality,

‘gender and culture affect leaders’ style, behaviour,

emergence and effectiveness in many complex ways’ (Ayman

&Korabik, 2010; p.166). This study seeks to elucidate aspects

of this complexity. Additionally, insufficient attention has

been paid to how gender combined with other social identities

(such as ethnic and cultural identities) influences leadership

(Ayman &Korabik, 2010).This study also seeks to examine

identities simultaneously in the context of leadership. A

framework for doing this is then proposed.

Intersecting gender and ethnic identities

9

Ethnic and gender identities are both central to our

self-concepts (Hogg & Abrams, 1988), yet in research they are

often considered independently as the determining feature of

individuals’ experiences, in isolation from other identity

strands. Leadership studies on diversity often focus on

single categories, limiting our understanding of the

complexity of individuals’ experiences (Coleman, 2012).

However, arguably, asking people to account for experiences

based on one category (e.g. ethnicity) to the exclusion of the

other (e.g. gender) is an invalid conceptualisation of reality

when membership of both is confounded in individuals (Cole,

2009). Such‘ essentialism’ categorises individuals’ cognitive

processes, personalities and experiences in relation to single

identity categories (such as gender) without considering how

other factors (such as other identities, historical and

current social context)influence these (Bohan, 1993;

Gunaratnam, 2003).Such essentialist assumptions parallel

previously discussed critiques of universalism in leadership

research.

One response to essentialist critiques is the

intersectionality framework. Intersectionality draws attention

10

to multiple category membership and, in this study, the

implications for leadership. Intersectionality is the “idea

that social identities such as race, class, and gender

interact to form qualitatively different meanings and

experiences’’ (Warner, 2008, p. 454). The term is often

attributed to Crenshaw (1991), who drew attention to African

American women’s invisibility resulting from their minority

status in gender and race scholarship. Consequently, ethnic

minority women became subsumed into categories that did not

accurately reflect their perspectives and experiences. In the

twenty years since Crenshaw’s work, management researchers

have adopted intersectionality to examine how multiple

identity dimensions such as sexual orientation, social class,

and nationality influence women’s leadership and work

experiences across the globe (e.g. Essers & Benschop, 2009;

Hite, 2007; Pompper, 2007). Intersectional perspectives

integrate feminist and multiculturalist perspectives, to

understand women’s experiences from a more nuanced perspective

(Ali, Mahmood, Moel, Hudson & Leathers, 2008; Silverstein

2006).They highlight how all identity categories depend on

each other for meaning and significance. Intersectionality

11

therefore also draws attention to Whiteness. Whiteness as a

privileged ethnicity is often ignored in organisational

diversity research(Bell, Meyerson, Nkomo, & Scully, 2003; and

McIntosh, 1992; being notable exceptions).This study seeks to

contribute to the leadership literature by adopting an

intersectional framework to examine how disadvantaged and

privileged identities in combination may shape women’s

leadership experiences.

Towards inclusive leadership theories

Leadership and socio-demographic identities are closely

entwined (Sanchez-Hucles& Davis, 2010) despite their limited

attention in the literature. Leaders’ social identities

relative to their followers influenced their effectiveness and

the extent to which they felt able to enact their leader

identity according to a study by Van Knippenberg, 2011. Other

studies suggest prototypical leaders (typical or exemplary

representatives of a group) are liked more and have more

positive relationships with subordinates and colleagues. This

increases the likelihood that people will comply with

requests, further reinforcing leader-follower relationships

(Hogg, 2001; Sluss & Ashforth, 2008). The leadership

12

perceptions that colleagues hold of minority group members may

be weaker as they do not so easily fit into the mental

representations held by people of these roles. For example,

incongruence between female stereotypical attributes and the

generally masculine environment at the top of many

organisations may contribute to prevailing ‘glass ceiling’

effects faced by women (van Knippenberg& Hogg2003).Research

has also indicated that ‘third-country’ academics face

significant challenges in interacting with students from

different socio-cultural backgrounds who have different

expectations as to these academics’ roles, behaviour and

leadership style (Dedoussis 2007).

Although non-proportional representation at the top

suggests bias effects, leadership scholars can go beyond

‘counting’, to directly tackling the universalist critiques of

leadership studies (Chin, 2010). One way to examine the link

between leadership, diversity and identities more meaningfully

is via an emic approach to research (Ayman &Korabik, 2010).

An emic approach examines leadership within an under-studied

sample. Focusing on a minority group diverges from much

organisational diversity research which often examines

13

majority perceptions or differential group outcomes against

fixed variables (Sawyer,Salter, &Thoroughgood,2013). An emic

approach develops themes salient within the data. This

emergent approach is considered particularly appropriate for

studying the dynamic and complex reality of organisational

diversity (Ozbilgin & Tatli, 2012). The goal is not to

validate established leadership theories, but to contribute

towards the development of more inclusive leadership theories.

An emic approach works symbiotically with etic approaches by

providing initial data that are subsequently replicated with

multiple studies (Berry, 1999).

This study seeks to examine how minority respondents make

sense of their own leadership experiences. It is an

exploratory study of an under-examined sample’s leadership

perceptions, aiming to contribute towards developing inclusive

theories of leadership for organisations and educational

institutions. The study was conducted within a

constructivism-interpretivism paradigm, in which knowledge is

co-constructed and no single ‘truth’ sought (see Ponterotto,

2010). A qualitative methodology comprising of focus groups

and interviews was used with Black, Asian and White women in

14

leadership positions. This will contribute to the leadership

and diversity literature, particularly knowledge on leadership

for diversity, with implications for developing a diverse

leadership and fostering different leadership styles (as

recommended by Coleman and Cardno, 2006).

This study explored how intersecting ethnic and gender

identities shaped British White and minority ethnic women’s

constructions and enactment of leader identities. An

intersectional framework enabled analysis of privileged and

disadvantaged identities arising from the simultaneous

positioning of leadership with minority gender and

majority/minority ethnic identities. Intersectionality also

enabled openness to social identities that emerged from the

data.

Methodology

Participants

A diverse group of 130 women participated, 70 of South

Asian ethnicity (Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi), 40 of Black

(African/African-Caribbean) ethnicity, and 20 of White English

ethnicity. Participants were aged between 25 and 60, with 5

15

to 25 years’ work experience. They self-identified as leaders

in private and public sector organisations, their local

community, or as entrepreneurs working in a leadership

capacity. Due to the study’s exploratory nature, a wide range

of women leaders were sought. Participants included CEOs,

partners of professional firms, business owners, senior civil

servants, local politicians and senior public sector workers.

This ‘maximum variation’ sampling technique (a type of

purposeful sampling) is suitable for capturing and describing

central themes that cut across a wide group of participants

(Patton, 1990).

Researchers

The study’s constructivist-interpretivist approach

required a ‘multi-voicing’ dimension, indicative of reflective

scholarship (Alvesson, Hardy & Harley, 2008). It is therefore

important to share the researchers’ backgrounds, using an

intersectional lens to describe salient social identities.

Pertinent identities related to ethnicity (Black and White),

discipline (management and education), gender (female) and

privileged class and education. The first author self-

identified as ‘British upper-middle class socialised White’,

16

having been raised by a White family as the only person of

colour in a small English town. She was thus aware of her

continuously shifting insider/outsider status as a researcher

within the Black British community. The second author had a

privileged upbringing in Nigeria. She became aware of her

class privilege intersecting with minority ethnic status when

she began her professional career in the UK. She identifies

more strongly with African and professional identities

compared to ‘Black British’. The third author self-identifies

as a White woman of mixed ethno-religious heritage (Eastern

European Jewish/Catholic), whose interest in race was raised

when she became involved in researching issues around degree

attainment amongst minority ethnic students in the UK. The

first author’s professional background is in Education and

Business, that of the second author is in Organisational

Psychology and that of the third author is in Health and

Education. All authors are trained qualitative researchers

with extensive experience of studying equality and diversity

in their respective disciplines.

The authors’ professional identities as researchers and

consultants located them as ‘sometimes privileged’ relative to

17

this study’s participants. The first author conducted all the

data collection. Data analysis for the purpose of this paper

was conducted by the first and second authors. Through the

analytical process, the authors engaged in regular discussion

around their experiences and interpretations of the

transcripts. In developing the findings, they strived to

respectfully reflect the range of participants’ perspectives

in this study.

Approach

Semi-structured focus group and interview guides were

used to examine notions of identity and leadership. The

guides comprised a set of open questions based on the areas of

theoretical interest. Specifically, participants were asked

questions around three key areas 1) their personal definitions

of leadership, 2) the relationship between their social (i.e.

gender/ethnic) and leader identities, and 3) their career

journey to leadership, including when they first saw

themselves as leaders, and factors that may have hindered this

journey.

18

The prevailing aim of this type of study was to provide

rich contextualised knowledge of this sample (Maracek, 2003).

In keeping with the study’s exploratory nature and its

constructivist-interpretivist approach, questions were used to

initiate discussions and followed up with extensive probing.

This elicited diverse responses rather than a systematic,

reproducible list. Ethics were considered by adhering to the

British Educational Research Association guidance. Pseudonyms

were employed as a means to provide anonymity to the

participants. All participants were given the option of opting

out of the study during and after their interview.

The women were approached through the Race for

Opportunity (RfO) Champion Network, who funded the research.

The RfO campaign is led by Business in the Community (BITC), a

UK corporate-led charity focusing on responsible business.

Invitations for participants in a study on ‘Identity and

Leadership’ were distributed via email to network members.

Women who indicated interest were informed about voluntary

participation and assured about response anonymity.

Additionally,30 participants were recruited through snowball

19

sampling, having heard about the study through friends or

colleagues.

An RfO Administrator allocated respondents to focus group

sessions across the country. Three sessions were conducted in

London and six sessions conducted across North and Central

England in Nottingham, Birmingham, Manchester, Bradford and

Sheffield. Only minority ethnic women participated in focus

group sessions. There were 28 women in the three London groups

(4, 14 and 10 respectively); and 100 women in the North and

Central England groups (8, 14, 18, 18, 16 and 26

respectively).

There were some differences in demographic composition

across the regions. In London most participants (80%) were in

senior management roles in public and private sector

employment, comprising Asian and Black women between 28 and 60

years old. Outside London, leadership experiences were

gleaned from wider contexts including the local community and

independent businesses. Additionally, participants were

mostly between 30 and 40 years old, of which 80% were Asian

women. These demographics reflect the ethnic distribution in

the UK, with larger populations of Asians living outside

20

London, compared to other ethnicities. For the purposes of

this paper, no further comparative analysis across regions was

conducted.

Each focus group session lasted one and a half to two

hours, during which refreshments were served. Considering the

limited time and the size of some of the sessions, the first

author was sensitive to the risk of group dynamics restricting

some participants’ contributions. To mitigate against this,

responses were collated on ‘sticky notes’ and incorporated

into the data analysis, in addition to verbal data.

Additionally, the first author employed group facilitation

skills and open, probing questioning to ensure all

participants were engaged and fully participated in the

discussion. Finally, all respondents were encouraged to

contact the first author if they felt they had more to share

after the session.

Sixty follow-on interviews were conducted with minority

ethnic female focus group participants for additional in-depth

exploration and validation of initial findings. Interviews

were also conducted with20 White women. These women were

approached via the BITC Women’s Network. It was explained to

21

them that a research study was being conducted on identity and

leadership. Interviews were conducted face-to-face in private

offices or via telephone. The interviews lasted about 30

minutes.

Analysis

Focus groups and interview responses were recorded and

fully transcribed. Data were then analysed thematically, as

the researchers sought to make explicit the structures and

meanings the participants embodied in their responses (Gavin,

2008). Although it might be expected that minority ethnic

women would report particular challenges in enacting

leadership behaviours, in accordance with the constructivist

and exploratory approach, no hypotheses were proposed.

Rather, the aim was to ground findings in the data (Glaser and

Strauss 1967). The question guiding the enquiry was “How do

ethnicity, gender (and other identities) influence majority

and minority ethnic women’s leadership?’

Coding and analysis were conducted in an iterative,

constant comparative process between focus group and interview

responses. The first author began with open coding (breaking

22

down and categorising). Here, salient and meaningful

descriptions regarding the intersection of leadership and

other social identities were coded directly from the data.

This was followed by both authors engaging in axial and

selective coding for the purpose of this paper. Here,

relationships between codes were considered and categorised

into higher order themes. During analysis, both authors

adopted ‘intersectional sensibilities’ (Crenshaw, 1991; Bowleg

2008). This meant paying attention to when and how gender,

ethnic and any other identities became salient in respondents’

experiences of leadership.

Findings

Analyses revealed two broad areas in which gender,

ethnicity and other identities became salient in the women’s

leadership reflections. These were leadership self-

definitions and the extent to which they enacted leadership.

Defining Leadership

Virtually all respondents were expressive about what

leadership meant to them, confirming their self-identification

as leaders. Three themes emerged from the interviewees’

23

definitions of leadership. First, leadership was defined in

gender/race neutral terms (reflecting universalist assumptions

of leadership). This theme was most prominent in White

women’s transcripts. Two additional themes regarding facets

of leadership emerged from the minority ethnic women’s

definitions. Their leadership constructions reflected an

internal ethno-cultural ‘ grounding’ component, and, the

associated behaviours suggested a strong external orientation

towards others. This relational aspect of leadership

comprised awareness of, and sensitivity to, the difference

around them.

For White women, the significance of vision, inspiring others,

and standing up for personal values, regardless of one’s

position, was prevalent. For example:

I think leadership for me is really about accountability,

responsibility, so a leader I think can be anywhere in

any part of any organisation. (White female)

For me leadership is the person who sets the direction,

that sets the strategy, that makes sure that people are

24

pulling, together, and actually also sets the ways of

working. (White female)

Such leadership conceptions reflected the latest theories

in mainstream management and leadership models. For example,

the notion of leadership being ‘anywhere’ aligns with

distributed leadership (e.g.Gronn, 2002) which departs from

traditional leadership models whereby leadership is embodied

in the sole individual at the top of the organisation.

Additionally, charismatic and transformational leadership

theories (e.g.Dvir et al, 2002) emphasise vision and

direction. In contrast to this alignment with contemporary ‘a

cultural’ leadership, most (85%) of the minority ethnic women

incorporated ethnicity or culture into their definitions of

leadership, indicating that their experiences of ‘difference’

were important dimensions in constructing leadership:

(A leader is)…someone who knows who they are culturally

and are comfortable in who they are and does not want to

change that. (Asian female)

25

(Leadership is how) your culturally lived experiences

shape your style, manner, and responses to people and

their situations. (Black female)

In addition to this internal orientation or cultural

grounding, the minority ethnic women presented an external

orientation, emphasising a relational aspect of leadership.

Compared to their White counterparts (who did emphasise

vision), they described leadership as creating a vision for,

and directing a team of people with diverse characteristics.

(Leadership is about)…remembering you have got different

groups around you that need a simple clear definition of

where you are taking them. (Asian female)

I came here when I was two, so (my) cultural identity is

probably a mixed identity... … in terms of how it impacts

your leadership you are particularly sensitive to issues

around race, around sex, around minority groups. (Asian

female)

In addition to this cultural dimension, there was a sub-theme

of commitment to followers, who took a prominent role relative

to them. For example:

26

I define leadership as giving yourself to others, using

it as an opportunity to serve, using your gifts and

talents for others … I see leadership as giving back and

serving people through those various given talents or

your area of expertise. (Black female)

In contrast, there was no evidence of cultural/ethnic

diversity as an ‘internal compass’ or external orientation in

the White women’s leadership definitions. When asked

specifically about the relationship between personal

identities and leadership style, the differences between the

groups became more exaggerated. Firstly, it appeared that the

minority ethnic women were more comfortable engaging with this

question, compared to their White counterparts. While the

Black, Asian and women of mixed ethnicity freely discussed the

interplay between personal, social, professional and leader

identities, it appeared to be the first time that most (80%)

of the White women had explored the notion of ‘identity’ in

this way. All the minority ethnic women appeared comfortable

articulating how intersections of gender and ethnicity

contributed to their current selves as leaders. For example,

in the quote below, the woman responded spontaneously,

27

equating her leadership skill to her cultural upbringing and

parents’ work ethic.

Do you mean identity as in your ethnicity? As a Pakistani

woman – then yes. I would say that my leadership skill is

based more towards my parents’ ethnicity, which is the

hard work ethic. (Asian female)

In contrast, the small number of White women tended to view

leadership as more innate and therefore were often conscious

of being leaders from a young age. Some of the women talked

about their experiences of being leaders in early childhood

activities such as Brownies or becoming school prefects.

Enacting leadership

A second overall theme concerned how intersecting

identities influenced leader identity enactment. Rather than

merely influencing constructions and self-definitions of

‘leadership’ (i.e. leadership as noun), gender, ethnic, social

class, and religious identities were evident in the women’s

descriptions of leadership behaviour (i.e. leadership as

verb). One sub-theme that emerged was that gender and class

identity categories were more prevalent in White women’s data,

28

and ethnicity and religion in minority women’s data. A further

sub-theme of leadership enactment concerned career barriers to

progression. There were differences between the majority and

minority ethnic women regarding the extent to which they

perceived that others enabled or constrained their progression

into leadership positions. Ninety-five per cent (105)of

minority ethnic participants related barriers they had

encountered at work, compared to 40% (8)of the White women.

When considering how intersecting identities influenced

the extent to which they enacted their leader identities, most

of the White women (70%, 15) struggled to name specifics.

Additionally, some White women’s narratives suggested they had

self-identified/been identified as leaders from early

childhood, facilitating their enactment of leadership today:

At school I would volunteer to do things like to be a

house rep and I was a leader of the school orchestra and

a number of other orchestras ...I … did take

responsibility. (White female)

Two things that were said about me “...she is a born

leader and an organiser”… and in some ways even in some

29

of the junior roles, I was often looked up to by others.

(White female)

The above accounts suggest that the women’s leader

identities were enabled early in their lives – from school and

early careers. However this was not prevalent in all

participants’ experiences. For example, one woman felt her

working-class background had been a barrier to progression,

which she had overcome through persistence:

I have just constantly plugged at it. …I don’t come from

anything other than a working class background and

therefore I went to a really rubbish school…I have never

found an absolute barrier but my class and my lack of

contacts and the fact that my parents didn’t have

contacts meant that when I did eventually get a job it

was at the lowest level in the organisation. (White

female)

The following quotes indicate how barriers on account of

gender were identified (and potentially strategically avoided)

early in the women’s careers.

30

I think there were some (challenges) initially around

gender certainly because of where I was working, because

I worked in the financial sector and I think it was

particularly difficult to be perceived as a leader when

you are surrounded by leaders who are mostly men. (White

female)

Career barriers linked to the intersection of gender with

class were also discussed with regards to early career

experiences.

Nobody has plotted my career. My parents thought it would

be really good if I became a PA to a businessman. (White

female)

Coming from a very working class background, being the

first in my family ever to go to university, you know you

are breaking so many sorts of barriers by being the

first; so I think there comes a point where you realise

that your own insecurities and your own identity issues

are just the things that hold you back more, you know

sometimes feeling like an imposter. (White female)

31

When I think about it ...my leadership is very much

followership as I expect people to follow the way in

which I lead. (Black female)

Along with the popularly referenced leadership traits, there

were additional subtle characteristics discussed, such as

managing managers, tolerating diversity and showing a sense of

humour as contributing to the making of a good leadership.

In contrast to their White counterparts, all the minority

women perceived more concrete, external barriers and

challenges to enacting their leader identities. They tended to

describe social/structural rather than personal psychological

barriers. There were several references to others denying or

questioning minority ethnic women’s leadership capacities

based on stereotypical assumptions.

Sometimes there is an assumption about their (minority

ethnic women’s) capacity to lead and whether people would

actually follow them. (African-Caribbean female)

Sometimes people don’t think that ethnic minority women

can lead because they may appear to have less confidence

or assertiveness because of coming across quieter. They

32

may not speak up, perhaps not expressing their views as

forcefully as maybe their White counterparts. (Asian

female)

Despite personal definitions of leadership that embraced

ethno-cultural identities (presented in the previous section),

the women faced a different type of leadership defined and

sustained by institutional culture. This type of leadership

was influenced by the demographic profile of those holding

most of the leadership positions in the organisations, that

is, White men. Most of the respondents (95%)were the only

person of colour at their grade within their building.

Consequently, the majority (90%) of the minority ethnic women

discussed having to ‘leave their culture at the door’ to fit

into their organisation’s culture and advance in their

organisation. Those who opted out of this reported serious

consequences for non-conformity. For example, 40% of the

Muslim Asian women reported that their clothing prompted

others to make assumptions about them and served as ‘blockers’

to developing authentic relationships.

33

I think being an Asian woman, plus I wear a headscarf, I

think some people find it difficult to relate to that.

(Asian female)

In terms of progression and leadership opportunities, the

minority ethnic women generally perceived that the challenges

were exacerbated at senior levels.

If you do something at a particular (i.e. senior) level

you will always be challenged...the challenge is a lot

harder for Black women. (African-Caribbean female)

Thus, it was generally believed that the only way to

progress was to adopt the dominant culture at personal cost,

or to leave.

There seems to be a need to assimilate ... leave parts of

you at home. In certain sectors assimilation/mirroring

became such a struggle that it led me to leaving the

organisation and setting up business on my own.(African-

Caribbean female)

A related challenge was breaking down the preconceived

and restrictive uni-dimensional impressions held by followers.

34

Here, intersecting gender, ethnic and religious stereotypes

were prevalent.

When you are in leadership roles they still want to

stereotype you...you must be like this because you are

Muslim, or you must be like this if you are an

African/Caribbean woman...People try to box you in and if

you are a White leader I would imagine, I don’t know I’m

not one, or if you are a male leader you don’t have to be

defined by this very strict box, you can be whoever you

want to be. (Asian female)

Barriers to being ‘whoever you want to be’ constituted a

continuous wearing down of the minority ethnic women’s

authority. In one Black woman’s words “the challenges come

daily, minutely in so many contexts”.

In further exploration of leadership enactment, there was

a range of responses from White respondents regarding the

extent to which ethnicity may enable or constrain women’s

leadership abilities. This question also appeared to elicit

new reflections as several (70%) of the White women paused or

commented that they had not considered this before. In

35

response, a few (20%) acknowledged the privilege of White

ethnicity in leadership positions. Notably, none of the White

women equated personal experiences of gender discrimination to

minority ethnic women’s potential experiences of racial

discrimination. Neither did they adopt the ‘double jeopardy’

model by assuming that minority ethnic women’s experiences

would be an additive of their minority ethnicity and gender.

Although they did not go far as to say that

gender/ethnic/other social identity intersections influenced

leadership construction and enactment, all of the women who

responded in this way observed that society treated ethnicity

as a uniquely disadvantaged status that would invariably

further influence minority ethnic women’s leadership careers.

Even from school and hanging out with Indian friends, the

way people react to them and to me was different and they

would have different assumptions...in terms of who I was

and who they were, just by looking at them So yes, I am

sure there is a difference in terms of the way that I am

treated (as a White woman leader).(White female)

Well I’m sure there will be barriers and I’m sure it can

take longer, I’m absolutely sure about that, because that

36

is the way society is and I can’t equate obviously, being

a White woman, I can’t equate with those barriers myself.

(White female)

All the women recognised the significance of others in

fast tracking their leadership paths. However, only a minority

of women (40% of White women and 20% of minority ethnic women)

felt they received the necessary support. All the women

recognised the significance of relationships with line

managers, or other forms of indirect support (champion, mentor

or coach) for career success. The major difference between

majority and minority ethnic women’s views on how

relationships facilitated career progression concerned access

to networks. All the White women discussed opportunities they

had to belong to informal and official networks (e.g. for

women in banking or law professions) that had enhanced their

careers. Although virtually all the minority ethnic women

belonged to the RfO Network, many reported frustration with

perceived restricted access to the ‘closed’(informal)

organisational networks which directly impacted promotion

prospects and their path to visible leadership roles. For

37

some, support was evident for their White male colleagues. In

describing her organisation’s culture, one woman explained:

(It’s about)...promoting White male colleagues and

softening their fall or managing their

mistakes...colleagues gathering round... providing

mentoring/coaching to promote White males forms part of

the organisational culture. (Asian female)

In general, minority ethnic women felt they required more

guidance and support to counterbalance their lack of

networking opportunities. The quote below indicates some

awareness of the class barriers, intersecting with gender and

ethnicity that limit career progression.

I think that there needs to be something on equipping

Black women to navigate around organisations. Because we

do not have the same networks or my father wasn’t a

banker necessarily; we don’t necessarily have the same

network circles. That means we have to learn how to play

the game, nobody is telling us what the rules are and so

I do think there is something around equipping us to

navigate around organisations. (Black female)

38

We will now consider our findings in the context of the

literature on leadership and leadership identity formation.

Discussion

This qualitative study adopted an intersectional lens to

examine the leadership experiences of a relatively under-

studied group. An intersectional framework, which assumes that

social identities work together to define people’s

experiences, revealed how gender, ethnicity and other

identities played out in British White and minority ethnic

women’s constructions and enactment of leadership.

Reviews of leadership literature critique the limited

consideration of diversity in this significant area of

organisational studies (e.g. Ayman & Korabik, 2010; Chin

2010). The White women in this study demonstrated awareness of

contemporary models of leadership including its distributive

and visionary dimensions. In contrast, the minority ethnic

women’s self-definitions of leadership appeared to indicate a

simultaneous internal and external orientation that was

39

grounded in their ethno-cultural identities. This external

orientation parallels servant leadership models. The servant

leader is follower-centric; seeking to meet others’ needs and

develop them, contributing to follower satisfaction (Stone,

Russell & Patterson, 2004).However, the minority women’s

apparent heightened attention to follower diversity suggests

an ‘other’ orientation that parallels other culturally nuanced

leadership models. One example is the ‘Ubuntu’ model of

leadership derived from South African cultures. ‘Ubuntu’ has

been defined as ‘humaneness’ - embracing a spirit of caring,

community, harmony, hospitality, respect and responsiveness

(Mangaliso, 2001). At the core of this philosophy lie respect,

dignity and care for individuals and groups. Connection with

the collective parallels the minority ethnic women’s external

orientation of leadership, an apparent outcome of their

experiences as minority individuals. This conceptualisation

of leadership also broadly fits with emerging models of

leadership effectiveness in a global world. Like

Multicultural Leadership (Thomas, 2005), sensitivity to

difference in self and others reflects psychological awareness

of personal identities, potentially including awareness of

40

one’s disadvantaged and privileged positions and seizing

opportunities to learn through others’ world views. Authentic

leadership (Avolio and Gardner 2005) is predicated on the idea

that by heightening their self-awareness, regulating their

behaviour and acting as a positive model, leaders will foster

authenticity amongst followers. Authenticity refers to the act

of owning one’s personal experience and achieving consistency

between one’s inner thoughts and feelings with one’s external

behaviour. From this perspective, attention is drawn to the

tension between public and private presentations and how

minority ethnic and female leaders manage this relationship.

As assumptions of (gender and ethnic) neutrality in

leadership privilege majority groups (in this case, White

ethnicity and male gender), it is unsurprising that the women

named their disadvantaged identities in discussing barriers to

progressing and enacting leadership. White women discussed

class (even though this was not explicitly asked) and minority

ethnic women discussed ethnicity. The women differed regarding

the extent to which they could exercise the privilege of

freely enacting their leadership identities. Most of the

White women had not previously considered the privilege that

41

their Whiteness bestowed in the positions they held. Neither

did any minority ethnic woman discuss having had a privileged

upbringing or education. However, minority professionals are

often privileged in some ways. One study demonstrated how

minority professionals negotiated their privileged status

across context and in interaction with others (Atewologun &

Sealy, in press). However, we are more attuned to noticing

disadvantaged, rather than privileged, identities (Ely, 1995).

Privilege is often invisible and unconscious (Choules, 2006);

the absence of perceived tension may signal its presence. In

this study, no woman (of any ethnicity) mentioned ethnic or

class privilege without prompting, suggesting leadership

development is required in this domain. This is perhaps

unsurprising; privilege is frequently unearned and taken for

granted, with many subjects having no recognition of the

privileges that accrue from being White, male, middle class,

non-disabled and so on. There is a tendency to downplay the

active part people in positions of power and privilege play in

policy-making and the organisation of labour which prevent the

full participation of minorities in society. Leonardo (2004)

states that ‘Privilege is the daily cognate of structural

42

domination’ (p.148). Thus the acknowledgement and

problematisation of privilege is crucial to gaining a deeper

understanding of leadership and the workings of organisations.

Gender in isolation was not stated as a barrier for some

Black women in enacting leadership. However, there was rich

evidence of the salience of multiple minority identities in

defining leadership experiences. Also notable was Asian

women’s more frequent mention of cultural and religious

identities, compared to ‘racial’ (or skin colour) identities

by Black women. Further research is required to understand

within minority ethnic group differences in leadership

experiences.

Overall, the study demonstrated the interplay of

identities in women’s leadership experiences. The findings

reinforced Ospina and Foldy’s perspective on race/ethnicity as

“lived and carried out in leadership rather than a demographic

variable” (2009, p.881). It also extends this list,

suggesting the significance of culture, class, and religion in

leadership experiences. Class and religion may be more

salient categories of difference in the UK compared to the US.

British scholars have demonstrated how social class often

43

closely intertwines with minority ethnicity. In one study,

‘Black professional’ identities were as much about changing

class status as ethnicity for early career graduates (Kenny &

Briner, 2010). Another study indicated that early formative

experiences of racism combined with social class transition

enabled middle class Blacks to signal class membership,

minimising the probability of racial discrimination (Rollock,

Gillborn, Vincent, & Ball, 2011).In the current study, class

was raised by the majority rather than minority ethnic women.

This perhaps reflected the middle class status of many of the

(minority ethnic) managers and professionals, rendering their

class privilege invisible. Further research is required to

examine how class privilege intersecting with other minority

identities may facilitate leadership.

The study suggested more implications for leader identity

management for minority ethnic women compared to their White

counterparts. On one hand, their leadership self-constructions

were infused with ethnic and cultural references. On the

other hand, they reported that progression and leadership

enactment were dependent on discarding atypical identities and

assimilating into dominant cultures. The need for minority

44

ethnic professionals to engage in various identity management

strategies for career advancement has been widely documented

(e.g. Bell, 1990; Helwin, 2003; Parker, 2005; Atewologun &

Singh, 2010). . Future research could focus on how self-views

of leadership change over time for prototypical and non-

prototypical professionals.

Another aspect differentiating majority and minority

ethnic women’s experiences of barriers to enacting leadership

was the apparent role of time. The White women discussed

predominantly historical challenges to leadership and

progression. Perhaps they were able to manoeuvre early and

directly contest or exit environments unfavourable to their

development and progression. In contrast, minority ethnic

women appeared to report more current and pervasive

challenges. This pattern, of minority ethnic women facing more

barriers and having fewer options than White women as they

negotiate their career paths, reflects trends in the wider

labour market, for example, despite the fact that Black women

are well-represented at undergraduate level in UK higher

education institutions, they are almost invisible in the most

senior ranks of the sector (Mirza 2006).

45

Additionally, most of the White women appeared to

struggle to provide specific examples of challenges. They

hesitated and often paused, possibly indicating effort in

recalling past memories. In contrast, in response to questions

about challenges to leader development and enactment, the

minority ethnic women laughed and asked questions like ‘Where

do I start?’ The data collected about challenges to

leadership enactment were self-report perceptions rather than

independently observed, thus may reflect self-report bias.

Additionally, the qualitative nature of the data offered no

commentary regarding a quantifiable ‘double’ toll on minority

ethnic women. However, the data suggested a qualitative

difference in the nature of challenges facing women in their

leadership journeys.

Reports of daily challenges to leadership enactment

indicated that many of the minority ethnic women leaders faced

everyday microaggressions. Microaggressions are “brief and

commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, or environmental

indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that

communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative …slights and

insults” (Sue, et al, 2007, p. 271). Microaggressionsare

46

directed on the basis of individuals’ gender, disability,

racioethnicity, sexual orientation, or other identities.

Research on the frequency, nature and impact of workplace

incivilities and microaggressions is growing (De Souza, 2008).

These findings suggest research into additional facets of

microaggressions. For example, differences in frequency of

microaggression over one’s career could be examined using

longitudinal designs.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated how identity intersections played

out in White, Black, Asian and minority ethnic women leaders’

experiences in the UK. Identities forged of racio-ethnicity,

gender, religion and class had significant influences on how

the women related to ‘leadership’. The main contribution of

this study was the application of intersectional identities to

reveal the women’s considerable variation in conceptions and

enactment of leadership. Compared to White women, minority

ethnic women perceived greater links between personal, social

and leader identities, and described more current and

pervasive barriers to enacting their leader identities across

a range of sectors of employment in the UK. This exploratory

47

study has suggested several avenues for further research on

the subtleties and complexities of intersecting identities in

under-examined groups (as recommended by Diemer, 2002).

Limitations. This was a qualitative exploratory study of

an under-examined sample, conducted in line with

constructivist-interpretivist principles. The extent to which

the findings are expected to generalize to the wider

population are therefore limited. In adopting an emic approach

to leadership study, the participants self-defined as leaders.

While no standardised definition of leadership was utilised

and no measure of leader effectiveness taken, the study aimed

to examine self-constructions of leadership rather than

validate these against leadership outcomes.

Another limitation is that due to the purposeful (rather

than random) sampling method used, the findings could reflect

sampling bias. We purposefully over-sampled minority ethnic

women for theoretical reasons, due to the relative absence of

this group’s experiences in leadership scholarship in

management and education research. Additionally, the lack of

data triangulation and reliance on focus groups and interviews

may have restricted insights gleaned regarding how and which

48

identity intersections influence leadership identity and

enactment for these British women. Although the design of

mixed focus groups enabled rich data on collective experiences

of leadership in this sample, it restricted the ability to

analyse responses by minority ethnic subgroups. Additionally,

our sample is drawn from a broad range of sectors and as such

we are unable to comment on how organisational context,

specific sectors and differing professions impact on and shape

a particular kind of leadership practice1. Comparative research

across different economic sectors and with a variety of

professional groupings could provide further insights into the

themes that emerged from this study.

Researcher learning and reflections. Whilst working on

this project we found our different identities offered

complimentary and sometimes contradictory views on the data

and its interpretation. Our professional and personal

experiences sometimes meant we viewed the notions of identity

and leadership through different yet interconnecting lenses.

However, we often resolved such contradictions through ongoing

dialogue and debate, which often enhanced individual and

1 We thank an anonymous reviewer for drawing this to our attention

49

collective learning (e.g. regarding sociological vs

psychological perspectives on identity formation). .Overall

our personal learning as researchers has been enhanced through

the opportunity to engage in on-going dialogue, discussion and

professional activity on the themes of leadership and leader

identities.

Implications. Despite some limitations, this study does

suggest some implications for organisations and scholars. It

draws on an ecologically valid group’s lived experiences of

leadership. One practical implication is that there may be

merit in tailoring leadership development programmes not just

to women or professionals of colour, but potentially for women

of colour as one cohort. These will create identity safe

spaces for women to discuss how gender, ethnic, religious and

class intersections may influence career progression,

leadership beliefs and behaviours. Identity safe spaces

facilitate connections across boundaries and openness to

difficult feedback (Mendoza-Denton et al, 2010), conditions

that enable learning and development. The apparent divide

between the White and non-White women’s experiences and

definitions of leadership suggests there is scope for women of

50

all backgrounds to engage in collaborative dialogue (as

recommended by Cole, 2008) and jointly reflect on their

privileges to challenge and change universalist leadership

assumptions in organisations. In addition to the areas of

additional enquiry presented earlier, this study also offers

considerations for developing inclusive leadership theories

and practice. For example Ubuntu leadership is hypothesised

to offer added value to businesses today (Mangaliso, 2001).

If organisations actively leverage from minority ethnic

members’ unique leadership style, this may expand

organisational options for surviving current economic turmoil

and leading global multicultural teams.

References

Acker, J. (1990) Hierarchies, jobs, and bodies: A theory of

gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4, 139-158.

Acker, J. (2006). Inequality regimes.Gender & Society, 20, 441-464.

Ali, S. R., Mahmood, A., Moel, J., Hudson, C., & Leathers, L.

(2008).A qualitative investigation of Muslim and Christian

women's views of religion and feminism in their

lives.Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 14, 38-46.

51

Alvesson, M., Hardy, C. & Harley, B. (2008).Reflecting on

reflexivity: Reflexive textual practices in organization

and management theory.Journal of Management Studies, 45, 480-501.

Atewologun D,& Sealy R (2013). Experiencing privilege at

ethnic, gender and senior intersections.  Journal of Managerial

Psychology,(in press)

Atewologun, D. & Sealy, R. (2011). Advancing racio-ethnic and

diversity theorising through ‘intersectional identity

work’.In Leslie A. Toombs (Ed.), Proceedings of the

Seventieth Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management

(CD).

Atewologun, D., & Singh, V. (2010). Challenging ethnic and

gender identities: an exploration of UK black

professionals’ identity construction. Equality, Diversity and

Inclusion: An International Journal, 29(4), 332-347.

Avolio, B.J. and Gardner, W.L. (2005) Authentic leadership

development: Getting to the root of positive forms of

leadership. The Leadership Quarterly 16, 315-338.

52

Avolio, B.J., Walumbwa, F. and Weber, T. J., "Leadership:

Current Theories, Research, and Future Directions" (2009).

Management Department Faculty Publications.Paper 37.

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/managementfacpub/37 (Accessed

April, 2012)

Ayman, R., &Korabik, K. (2010). Why gender and culture matter.

American Psychologist,

Bell, E. L. J. E., Meyerson, D., Nkomo, S. & Scully, M.

(2003).Interpreting silence and voice in the workplace: A

conversation about tempered radicalism among Black and

White women researchers.Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39,

381-414. #

Bell, E. L. (1990). The bicultural life experience of career‐

oriented black women.Journal of Organizational Behavior, 11(6),

459-477.

Berry, J. W. (1999). Emics and etics: A symbiotic conception.

Culture & Psychology, 5(2), 165-171.DOI: 10.1177/1354067X9952004

Billing, Y., & Alvesson, M. (2000).Questioning the notion of

feminine leadership: A critical perspective on the gender

53

labelling of leadership.Gender, Work and Organization, 7, 144-

57.

Bohan, J. S. (1993), Essentialism, Constructionism, and

Feminist Psychology. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 17: 5–

21. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1993.tb00673.x

Bowleg, L. (2008). When Black lesbian woman≠ Black lesbian

woman: The methodological challenges of qualitative and

quantitative intersectionality research. Sex Roles, 59, 312-

325.

Braverman, H. (1974)Labor and Monopoly Capital New York: Monthly

Review Press.

Breakwell, G. &Tytherleigh , M.Y. (2008). The Characteristics, Roles

and Selection of Vice-Chancellors.Summary Report. London:

Leadership Foundation for Higher Education.

Brown, M.K., Carnoy, M., Currie, E., Duster, T., Oppenheimer,

D.B., Shultz, M.M. and Wellman, D. (2003) White-washing race:

The myth of a color-blind society.Berkeley: University of California

Press.

54

Cassell, C., & Johnson, P. (2001). Epistemology and Work

Psychology: new agendas. tJournal of Occupational and

Organizational Psychology,74, 125-143.

Choules, K. (2006). Globally privileged citizenship. Race,

Ethnicity and Education, 9, 275-293.

Cole, E. R. (2009), "Intersectionality and research in

psychology", American Psychologist, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 170–180.

Coleman, M. (2012).Leadership and diversity.Educational

Management Administration & Leadership, 40(5), 592-609.

Coleman, M., &Cardno, C. (2006).Editorial Educational

Leadership and Diversity.Educational Management Administration &

Leadership, 34(2), 147-149.

Collins, P.H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, conscious, and the

politics of empowerment. Boston: Unwin Hyman

Crenshaw, K. (1991) Mapping the margins: Intersectionality,

identity politics, and violence against women of color.

Stanford Law Review, 1241-1299.

Davidson, M. (1997).The Black and Ethnic Minority Woman Manager: Cracking

the Concrete Ceiling, Sage Publications.

55

Dedoussis, E.V. (2007) Issues of diversity in academia:

through the eyes of ‘third-country’ faculty. Higher Education,

54, 135-156.

DeSouza, E. (2008). Workplace incivility, sexual harassment,

and racial micro-aggression: The interface of three

literatures. The psychology of women at work: Challenges and solutions

for our female workforce, 2, 65-84.

Diemer, M.A. (2002). Constructions of provider role identity among African

American men: An exploratory study. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic

Minority Psychology, 8, 30-40.

Dombeck, M. (2003). Work narratives: Gender and race in

professional personhood. Research in Nursing & Health, 26, 351-365.

Dvir, T., Eden, D., Avolio, B. J., & Shamir, B. (2002). Impact

of transformational leadership on follower development and

performance: A field experiment. Academy of management journal,

45(4), 735-744.

Ely, R. J. (1995). “The role of dominant identity and

experience in organizational work on diversity” in Jackson,

Susan E. (Ed); Ruderman, Marian N. (Ed). Diversity in work

56

teams: Research paradigms for a changing workplace, (pp. 161-186).

Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association.

Equality Challenge Unit (2014)Equality in higher education:

statistical report 2014 Part 1: staff. London: Equality

Challenge Unit.

Essers, C. &Benschop, Y. (2009). Muslim businesswomen doing

boundary work: The negotiation of Islam, gender and

ethnicity within entrepreneurial contexts. Human Relations, 62,

403-423.

Franklin, A.J. (2009). Reflections on Ethnic Minority

Psychology: Learning From Our Past so the Present Informs

Our Future. Cultural Diversity Ethnic Minority Psychology, 15, 416-424.

Gavin, H. (2008). Understanding research methods and statistics in

psychology. SAGE Publications Limited.

Glaser, B and Strauss, A.L. (1967)The discovery of grounded theory:

Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

57

Gronn, P. (2002). Distributed leadership as a unit of

analysis.The Leadership Quarterly, 13(4), 423-451.

Gunaratnam, Y. (2003), Researching Race and Ethnicity: Methods, Knowledge

and Power, Sage Publications Ltd.

Harding, S. (1987). Introduction: Is there a feminist method?

In S.Harding (Ed.) Feminism & methodology. Milton Keynes: Open

University Press

Hewlin, P. F. (2003). And the award for best actor goes to...:

Facades of conformity in organizational settings. Academy of

Management Review, 28(4), 633-642.

Hite, L. M. (2007). Hispanic women managers and professionals:

Reflections on life and work. Gender, Work & Organization, 14, 20-

36.

Hofstede, G. & Bond, M. H. (1988). Confucius and economic

growth: New trends in culture’s consequences. Organizational

Dynamics, 16, 4-21.

Hogg, M. A. (2001). A social identity theory of

leadership.Personality and social psychology review, 5(3), 184-200.

58

Hogg, M. A. and Abrams, D. (1988), Social Identifications: A Social

Psychology of Intergroup Relations and Group Processes, Psychology

Press.

Jonsen, K., Maznevski, M. L. & Schneider, S. C. (2011).

Special review article: Diversity and its not so diverse

literature: An international perspective. International Journal of

Cross Cultural Management, 11, 35-62.

Kenny, E. J., & Briner, R. B. (2010).Exploring ethnicity in

organizations.Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal,

29(4), 348-363.

Leonardo, Z. (2004) The Color of Supremacy: Beyond the

discourse of ‘white privilege’. Educational Philosophy and Theory 36,

2, 137-152

Lofland, J., Snow, D., Anderson, L., &Lofland, L.

(2006).Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative

observation and analysis. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson

Learning.

59

Mangaliso, M. P. (2001). Building competitive advantage from

ubuntu: Management lessons from South Africa. The Academy of

Management Executive, 15(3), 23-33.

Marecek, J. 2003. Dancing through Minefields: Toward a

Qualitative Stance in Psychology. In Qualitative Research in

Psychology: Expanding Perspectives in Methodology and Design, edited by

P. Carnic, J. Rhodes, and L. Yardley, 49-70. Washington,

DC: American Psychological Association.

McIntosh, P. (1992). White Privilege and Male Privilege: A

personal account of coming to see correspondences through

work in women’s studies, in M. Andersen & P.H. Collins (eds),

Race, Class, and Gender: An anthology (Belmont, CA, Wadsworth

Publishing).

Mendoza-Denton, R., Goldman-Flythe, M., Pietrzak, J., Downey,

G., &Aceves, M. (2010). Group value ambiguity:

Understanding the effects of academic feedback on minority

students’ self-esteem. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1,

127-135.

60

Middlehurst, R. (2008). Not Enough Science or Not Enough

Learning? Exploring the Gaps between Leadership Theory and

Practice.Higher Education Quarterly, 62, 322-339.

Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994).Qualitative Data Analysis: A

Sourcebook of New Methods, Sage Publications.

Mirza, H. (2006) Transcedence over Diversity: black women in

the academy. Policy Futures in Educationb 4.2: 101-113.

Ospina, S. &Foldy, E. G. (2009). A critical review of race and

ethnicity in the leadership literature: Surfacing context,

power and the collective dimensions of leadership.

Leadership Quarterly, 20, 876‐896.

Özbilgin, M. & Tatli, A. (2008).Global diversity management: an

evidence-based approach, Palgrave Macmillan.

Stone, A. G, Russell R. F. & Patterson, K. (2004).

Transformational versus servant leadership: a difference in

leader focus. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 25, 349 -

361

61

Parker, P. (2005).Race, Gender, and Leadership: Re-Envisioning

Organizational Leadership From the Perspectives of African American Women

Executives. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey

Patton, M. (1990).Qualitative evaluation and research methods

(pp. 169-186). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage

Plaut, V. C. (2010). Diversity science: Why and how difference

makes a difference. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 77-99.

Ponterotto, J. G. (2010). Qualitative research in

multicultural psychology: Philosophical underpinnings,

popular approaches, and ethical considerations. Cultural

Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 16(4), 581.

Pompper, D. (2007). The gender-ethnicity construct in public

relations organizations: Using feminist standpoint theory

to discover Latinas' realities. The Howard Journal of

Communications, 18, 291-311.

Race for Opportunity (2010).Race into higher education.Today’s

diverse generation into tomorrow’s workforce. London: Race

for Opportunity, Business in the Community.

62

Rollock, N., Gillborn, D., Vincent, C., & Ball, S. (2011). The

public identities of the Black middle classes: Managing

race in public spaces. Sociology, 45(6), 1078-1093.

Sawyer, K., Salter, N., &Thoroughgood, C. (2013). Studying

Individual Identities Is Good, But Examining

Intersectionality Is Better. Industrial and Organizational

Psychology, 6(1), 80-84.

Sealy, R., Vinnicombe, S., & Singh, V. (2008). The Pipeline to

the board finally opens: Women’s Progress on FTSE 100

boards in the UK. Women on Corpotate Boards of Directors:

International Research and Practice, 37-46.

Sealy R,&Vinnicombe S. (2013). False dawn of progress for women on

boards?Cranfield International Centre for Woman Leaders.

Silverstein, L.B. (2006). Integrating feminism and

multiculturalism: Scientific fact or science fiction?

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 37, 21-28.

Stogdill, R. M. (1948). Personal factors associated with

leadership: A survey of the literature. The Journal of

Psychology, 25(1), 35-71.

63

Sue, D. W., Parham, T.A., & Santiago, G. (1998). The changing

face of work in the United States: Implications for

individual, institutional and societal survival. Cultural

Diversity and Mental Health, 4, 153-164.

Sue, D. W., Capodilupo, C. M., Torino, G. C., Bucceri, J. M.,

Holder, A. M., Nadal, K. L., &Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial

microaggressions in everyday life.American Psychologist, 62(4),

271-286.

Tatli, A., & Özbilgin, M. F. (2012). An emic approach to

intersectional study of diversity at work: a bourdieuan

framing. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(2), 180-

200.

Thomas, K. M. (2005). Diversity dynamics in the workplace. Wadsworth

Pub Co.

VanKnippenberg, D. (2011). Embodying who we are: Leader group

prototypicality and leadership effectiveness.The Leadership

Quarterly, 22, 1078-1091

64