Whether you call it Yin/Yang –Chinese philosophy- or Animus/Anima
–Jung’s archetypes-, the idea of the feminine/masculine nature of things is not
new. Because women attach a great importance to social goals in their
work: relationships and collaboration, helping others and the environment in
which they live, sociologist Geert Hofstede called these goals feminine goals.
When women are empowered, they influence and “feminize” societies and economies in a positive way, and this becomes a virtuous circle. Small
entrepreneurship and policy making seem to be the route to empowerment.
As beneficiary of microcredit loans in developing countries, women
put particular emphases in developing their communities as a whole.
As part of policy making bodies in Nordic countries (>45%
of parliament in Sweden, even more at local community levels), they
have contributed to shape a unique collaborative approach.
Interestingly enough –and hopefully for you guys!-, Geert Hofstede points out that what he calls feminine goals and values in the work place are not a female exclusivity, and that differences exist between women and between men across nations. However, differences are narrower between women worldwide than they are between men. –Vikings, if I remember well, turn out to be the most feminine males, and American women, among the most masculine females-.
As the world becomes flatter and corporate social responsibility gains ground the values and goals that drive the corporate world are “feminizing”. Leaders are required to have more social and relationship skills. The increased role of women in management and leadership position will probably follow. It is yet a lengthy process, and will probably not be a landslide, as even countries like Sweden despite their huge percentage of women in policy making have a very low percentage of women in leadership positions. Why they don’t go there although they have the most “gender equal” society, is another story, probably linked to the motivation to exert an influence where they feel it will be the most “useful”…
It is true what you say of women, they look for cooperation, where men tend to look for conflict.
And women are truly better at building relations than most men at this moment in time. Although we should wait and see what happens as men get more time to develop feminine abilities.
As to why women tend to choose less often for open leadership roles? You might as well ask if most women think they already have enough power, through the men they influence. Many leaders say that their biggest help and coach is their wife. Especially the leaders who stay with their wife long enough to have risen with her through the hierarchy to their position of leadership express that their wife is their greatest confidant. So maybe that is the reason that women do not seek positions of power.
Besides many cultures still find it not done, for women to have power, even feminine cultures like the northern European. And in politics you also have to take the relations with other countries into account, when deciding whether you want a female or male political leader.
Posted by: Norman Dragt | March 18, 2007 at 12:14 PM
In response to a few comments I have received on the issue on another forum, I would like to add to this article that I have focused here on what researchers call feminine values: values of "expressivity", relationships and social orientation, which they distinguish from masculine values: values of "instrumentality", competition and assertiveness. Feminine and masculine values are shared by men and women alike, in different proportions among cultures. Referring to the feminization of values and empowerment of women the way I did above certainly does not call on the disappearance of masculine values, but rather to reaching a fruitful balance.
Posted by: Hélène | March 21, 2007 at 02:34 AM