Gender Differences and Similarities in the Leadership Styles of the UK Managers - Case Study Example

Critique of Gender differences and similarities in the leadership styles and behaviour of UK managers Name Institution Course Date A Critical Analysis of a Research Article Oshagbemi, T., & Gill, R. (2003). Gender differences and similarities in the leadership styles and behaviour of UK managers. Women in Management Review, 18(6), 288-298. Introduction Leadership style is a critical discourse to managers as result of the fact that it has a greater bearing on the subordinates’ productivity, attachment and job satisfaction (Adeyemi-Bello, 2001, p.150). According to Hersey & Blanchard (1993) leadership encompasses pattern of behaviours and interactions that leaders exhibit in the course of managing. In regard to the discourse of leadership style, there is contention whether leadership style of men and women differ (see for example Ogundele, Hassan & Doyin-Hassan, 2012; Andersen & Hansson, 2011; Jayasingam & Cheng, 2009; Melero, 2004; Moran, 1992). In regard to this realisation, Oshagbemi & Gill (2003) sought to establish if there are distinction between leadership style of men and women. Using the case study of UK managers, they found out that as compared to men, women are less likely to delegate. Further, they established that there is no significance difference in directive, consultative & participative leadership. Finally, they found out that there is significant dissimilarity among women and men in inspirational motivation, nonetheless not within the remaining parameters of leadership behaviour. Anchored on the Oshagbemi & Gill (2003) research findings, the paper critically examines article by Oshagbemi & Gill (2003) on gender on existence or non existence of dissimilarity of style of leadership between female and male gender. Choice of Research Topic, Case Study and Problem Addressed in the Research Leadership style is highly embedded on a leader’s behaviour giving birth to different leadership models. This is in respect to character, mannerism, influence and persuasion, relationship patterns, role relationship and as administrative figures (Jayasingam & Cheng, 2009, p.56). These behaviours includes intellectual stimulation, management-by-exception, individual consideration, contingent reward, inspirational motivation, idealised influence and laissez-faire (Oshagbemi & Gill, 2003, p.295). It these fronted parameters that have contributed to a great debate on whether there is difference on how men and women behave in respect to them while leading. These behaviours fronted greatly shapes the style adopted for instance participatory leadership & delegate leadership (Shamandi et al., 2011, p.47). Moreover, they highly influence the leadership model to be adopted say autocratic, nurturant task leader, participative leader among others (Jayasingam & Cheng, 2009, p.56). Oshagbemi & Gill (2003) assess if there is dissimilarity or convergence in leadership styles and behaviour of women & men using case example of UK managers. While numerous studies have been conducted in relation to difference leadership styles between women and women, we cannot argue that the studies have been exhaustive and thus, the topic is appropriate (see for example Ogundele, Hassan & Doyin-Hassan, 2012; Andersen & Hansson, 2011; Jayasingam & Cheng, 2009; Melero, 2004; Moran, 1992). In support for the choice of the research topic is validated by Moran (1992, p.488) who observes that “The area of gender variances in leadership styles is a field which is has vagueness and inconsistency. Notwithstanding the number of studies dedicated to the topic, there are a number of unanswered questions. Researchers will doubtlessly remain to check on the topic, and possibly, with time, we will get at some conclusive solutions to the question of whether there are distinctive variances in the males and females’ styles of leadership”. In a nutshell, the choice of the research topic and case study is appropriate in contributing to the discourse of existence or non-existence of difference in leadership style and behaviour between women and men. The only shortcoming on the research topic can be said to be on the lag of the topic in relation to gender difference in leadership style. This raises the concern fronted by Moran (1992, p.486-487) of how the issue of gender difference has moulted over given period of time. He notes that in certain timeframe, the discourse of difference was geared towards inherent sex linked characteristics. Secondly, it evolved to appreciation that while differences exist, women could re-model themselves to succeed in an organisation. Lastly, the appreciation that difference exists and this difference works to the advantage of women. Therefore anchored on this view, perhaps the study should have been geared towards answering how the gender difference works to the advantage of women in an organisation instead of merely establishing existence of difference. Steps Taken to Address the Research Problem and Reliability of Technique Adopted Research design might differ from one research to another as result of different varying parameters as informed by the research topic. For instance, data collection methods and population are likely to differ from one study even those examining the same subject. To answer the research problem, Oshagbemi & Gill (2003, p.293) employed Bass’s “Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire Form MLQ-5S Revised, 1989 to measure Laissez-faire, transactional & transformational leadership and organisational systems survey research”. These are highly reliable tools as reported by Yukl (2002, p.255 cited in Oshagbemi & Gill, 2003, p.292) who notes these are the most popular leadership instruments that have been utilised as compared to various method of analysis on transformational leadership. Indeed, the works of Bass in leadership cannot be disputed. For instance he has carried numerous works on parameter of measuring leadership styles (Bass, 1990, p.12-18). Outcome and Significance of the Research/ Findings The finding of the study advances a objective opinion on the existence of difference in leadership style and behaviour. It points out that there exists small difference in leadership style between men and women, but not in all aspects of leadership style and behaviours. For instance, Oshagbemi & Gill (2003) argues difference exists in certain aspects of leadership style between men and women and not a blanket generalisation. In their finding they note that women are less likely to delegate duties as compared to their male counterparts, but no significance difference in directive, consultative & participative leadership. Secondly, they point out that significant difference exist in relation to inspirational motivation, but not in relation the remaining leadership behaviour parameters. For instance, such trends of findings in existence of dissimilarity in style of leadership and behaviour is supported by Ogundele, Hassan & Doyin-Hassan (2012); Taleb (2010); Moran (1992). Indeed, the finding by Oshagbemi & Gill (2003) disputes the earlier held gender stereotypical beliefs that as result of nature and or nurture women are expected to be people caring oriented while men are expected to adopt better leadership styles (Melero, 2004, p.1; Ogundele, Hassan & Doyin-Hassan, 2012; Taleb, 2010, p.289). It goes ahead and affirms the fact that work place is different in terms of the normal societal social context and if taken from individual level studies there is dissimilarity in the manner that female and male managers lead because gender is a mere demographic parameter and not a differentiator in leadership styles and effectiveness. Since, if we were to follow normal stereotypical thinking the women should be expected to delegate more yet the opposite is true from the findings of Oshagbemi & Gill (2003). However, for a critical eye there is ambiguity in relation the research since other studies have shown that there is no gender difference or there exists inconsistence difference in leadership style as supported by literatures such as Andersen & Hansson (2011); Melero (2004). Since, if real difference was to exist as opposed to a subjective/ contextual difference we would expect similar answer for the research topic or if it was reduced to individual level then a more diverse answers are expected as opposed to generic one since manager are very diverse. This affirms the belief held by other literatures that there is no existence in gender difference in leadership style and that the difference experienced can boils down to individual difference that is not influenced by gender, but, by contextual issues within the organisation since men and women have similar aspirations (Andersen & Hansson, 2011, p.430). Nevertheless, the finding is a step towards answering the ambiguity and inconsistencies related to the topic of gender difference in leadership style and behaviour. Moreover, such findings can be used to suit to organisational needs for added competitive advantage. For instance, the research shows that women managers in UK are less delegative so where in an organisation where delegation is required it would be prudent to align women leaders to this reality. Assumptions Identified within the Approach, Conclusions or Evidence Presented ‘Men and women are judged by a different stereotype’ and these stereotypes influence the behaviour of the different genders (Manning, Pogson and Morrison, 2009, p.266). Moreover, the stereotypes fronted are different from one country to another or from one culture to another (see for example, Ogundele, Hassan & Doyin-Hassan, 2012, p.6). However, instead of the study falling into this trap, there is an appreciation of the fact that apart from stereotypes; gender difference extends to individual-level studies (Melero, 2004, p.1). The adoption of individual-level studies instead of gender stereotypes makes the study more objective driven as far as possible. Conclusion The goal of the paper was to conduct a critical analysis on the article by Oshagbemi & Gill (2003) titled “Gender differences and similarities in the leadership styles and behaviour of UK managers”. The paper first assessed the problem addressed by the article. In regard to this it established the problem addressed is the difference and similarities between the two genders. Secondly, the paper examined the significance of the study to the leadership discourse and it established to contribute to the addressing of associated ambiguities within the domain of difference in leadership styles. Lastly, the paper examined the assumptions presented in the paper and it established that the study avoided pitfalls of gender stereotypes and reduced the study to individual levels. References Adeyemi-Bello, T 2001, The impact of leadership style on organizational growth, Work Study, 50(4), 150-154. Andersen, J. A & Hansson, P. H 2011, At the end of the road? On differences between women and men in leadership behaviour, Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 32(5), 428-441. Bass, B. M 1990, Bass & Stogdill’s Handbook of Leadership: Theory, Research, and Managerial Applications, (3rd ed.), New York, The Free Press, A Division of Macmillan, Inc. Hersey, P and Blanchard K.H 1993, Management of Organizational Behaviour: Utilizing Human Resources, (6th ed.), New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc. Jayasingam, S & Cheng, MY 2009, Leadership style and perception of effectiveness: enlightening Malaysian managers, Asian Social Science, 5(2), 54-65. Melero, E 2004, Sex differences in managerial style: from individual leadership to organisational labour relationships (No. 1387), IZA Discussion paper series. Moran, B. B 1992, Gender differences in leadership, Library trends, 40(3), 475-491. Ogundele, O. J., Hassan, A. R., & Doyin-Hassan, A. B 2012, Leadership Styles of Male and Female Managers in Nigerian Organizations, Business & Management Review, 2(5). Oshagbemi, T & Gill, R 2003, Gender differences and similarities in the leadership styles and behaviour of UK managers, Women in Management Review, 18(6), 288-298. Shahmandi, E., Silong, A. D., Ismail, I. A., Abu Samah, B & Othman, J 2011, Competencies, Roles and Effective Academic Leadership in World Class University, International Journal of Business Administration, 2(1), 44-53. Taleb, H 2010, Gender and leadership styles in single-sex academic institutions, International Journal of Educational Management, 24(4), 287-302. Read More