Posted on 03/17/2018 5:35:47 PM PDT by simpson96
Most people will draw a man. Researchers investigate the consequences.
This series of images emerged from a simple prompt: “Draw an effective leader.”
Tina Kiefer, a professor of organizational behavior at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom, fell upon the exercise accidentally, while leading a workshop full of executives who did not speak much English. Since then it has been adopted by organizational psychologists across the world.
In terms of gender, the results are almost always the same. Both men and women almost always draw men.
“Even when the drawings are gender neutral,” which is uncommon, Dr. Kiefer said in an email, “the majority of groups present the drawing using language that indicates male (he) rather than neutral or female.”
And yet, her clients often insisted that what they meant by “he” is actually “both.”
Several researchers in organizational psychology who have had a similar experience with this exercise decided to investigate further. How might holding unconscious assumptions about gender affect people’s abilities to recognize emerging leadership? What they found, in a study posted by the Academy of Management Journal, seems to confirm what many women have long suspected: getting noticed as a leader in the workplace is more difficult for women than for men. Even when a man and a woman were reading the same words off a script, only the man’s leadership potential was recognized.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Because men are usually better leaders....
Pretending that women are the same as men, then looking for proof of bias by looking for evidence that people don’t all agree with you.
Yeah, that’s effective proof of... ?
love the gif, says it so well.
I disagree, in a way. Men are more likely to be leaders (in any organization that isn’t dominated by little kids). Some men are great leaders, most are middling, some are cruddy. However, when a woman achieves a position of leadership by her own efforts, because of her demonstrated gifts - Margaret Thatcher, for example - she is likely to be outstanding.
I can tell you who I don’t picture as a leader.
No, of course not, why would it be?
I’ve been working full-time since 1979. I’ve had 6 different careers by my count. Lots of companies. Lots of industries. In all that time, almost all of my bosses were women.
Never had a good female boss. Never. Leadership seems an uncommon trait in females. I have had, I believe 5 males bosses. Only 1 of the men lacked leadership ability. The other 4 were very good.
That’s my anecdotal input. (By the way, I’ve been the boss many times. I’m told I’m good at it.)
In all of recorded history, a "female leader" of anything consequential is extremely difficult to find.
Oh there are a few; however, how many were actually successful ON THEIR OWN, sans either riding the coat tails of some man; or successful at the end?
Bodeaca fought the Roman army, but in the end, she LOST the war.
Theodosia was smarter than her husband, but wouldn't have any say so on her own.
Queen Elizabeth I was GREAT; rare exception.
Should we count Joan of Arc? Yes, she was a successful "leader"; however, when all was said & done, her side LOST and she was denounced, tried, and burned at the stake.
Catherine the Great wouldn't have had any power at all, if she hadn't married a Czar and then refused to remarry; not that her reign was anything to shout about.
Queen Victoria was also a marvelous "LEADER" ( though she didn't have a whole lot of power ) on her own.
Maggie Thatcher was GREAT!
Florence Nightingale was a true "leader" and ahead of her time.
Oh sure, some women, throughout history have been as intelligent/more intelligent than men, and very clever; but, were not "leaders" of anything at all.
When all is said and done...of course people see men as "leaders"; it's only natural!
Ummm, not this one.
It is sad that wrong headed thinking maintains that natural law can be rewritten to equate the female species to male prowess. One only needs to look across the animal world to understand the natural arrangement of male and female. Try as they might, the revisionists can not change this natural law. Bottom line: Male and female are not the same and no amount of strained rhetoric can make it so.
If I picture a leader it sure as hell isn’t Hillary falling down stairs or thrown into a scooby van like a side of beef.
She forgot her shopping cart again.
This guy nails it! Mark Gungor - Men’s Brain Women’s Brain
Men and women are not equal. We are complimentary.
I think in general men are more focused and better leaders, women are more able to apply emptions to situations. There is plusses and minuses to that. (Although Hillary just said all white women are too stupid to vote without asking their husband, boss or brothers. And they wonder why she lost?????)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BxckAMaTDc
I “might” draw Margaret Thatcher, possibly Deborah of Bible fame. That is it. I do not want a woman leader.
Elizabeth I was the first person to come to my mind.
It depends on what she’s leading and who is being lead.
Only two genders? What happened to the rest?
LOL. We dodged one with Hilliary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.