Women in Politics

Women’s Engagement in Management Roles

One of the key problems with much that is written about organisation, is that rather simplistic frameworks are applied to what are complex systems. We tend to focus on the parts rather than seeing the whole. The organisation is a complex system of people and coalitions, each with particular interest, beliefs, values, inclinations and thoughts. Where organisation is considered a natural system, informal power relationship is highlighted with personnel assumed of as political actors, and organisations themselves shift to the political scenes. Other view of organisation as rational system stresses on formal relationships and specific goals. Under this presupposition, the organisation's employees are economic and rational entities. For political organisations, power is the most important criterion defining organisational behaviour and actors involved in constant power struggle to access the scarce organisational resources . In such systems, informal networks and coalitions are dynamic, making clash, discord and conflict as inevitable. The primary means are imposition and influence which divert and sustain power through political activities. Therefore, power, politics and influence constitute the process of organisational life and draws essential elements of the management positions.

In the theoretical debates of management, the notion is that gender affects the behaviours of managers through inter related processes as in gender politics. There are debates on factors affecting women's managerial positions and barriers forming hidden resistance and building glace ceiling - which might lead to their lower incentive to fill up higher occupational position. In most societies, there are certain stereotypes about women's management and work. That is to say women tend to rank family obligations above job commitments or women's employment is regarded as an extra income, thus don’t contest for promotions, and that women take negative feedback personally, not professionally and are easily discouraged by criticism, lacking mental capacity for higher level management and critical decision making. Devolution of power is rare for women managers making their executive positions less significant while they are judged according to their appearance rather than their conduct or force of character. Presuppositions such as these result in her work not been taken much seriously.

To study the main factors related to gender gap in management, numerous studies are conducted on the actual differences between male and female managers. Some studies stressed on the fact that women are less self confident, and have lower leadership skills when compared to men. Others point to the lack of achievement motivation to the inadequate presence of women in management positions. However there is few evidence to support the idea of the differences in achievement motivation of both gender. They are assigned more to often to lower level organisational positions which involve repetitious tasks. Usually women work in administrative positions or as assistants to manager, and executive responsibilities are rare occasions. Thus women least influence directly in the organisational decision making structure. Since they are absent in coalitions of decision making systems, therefore do not hold appropriate positions and lack organisational power. It should be noted that the current trend of engineering of society and formation of public opinion have led to over simplification of higher social positions.

Ultimately despite women's outstanding achievement in education and social activities, they have not been able to take their fair share in management positions. It is necessary to study the obstacles to the process of job mobility for female employees. Decision makers might hold back female managers because they fear that they will be discredited for having promoted an individual to a higher position in which she might show incompetence. As a result they prefer to appoint individuals that would least trigger general opinion. The implication of this fear is to weaken the female manager that she is inept and incapable or is too much dependent on the support, delay decision making. To gain power in organisations women should present will power, stamina and risk taking that is necessary to engage in challenging power games.



Women in Politics


A gender disparity exists… and will persist… Unless we work towards change!

Despite having won the right to vote and to stand for election, across the globe women constitute only 15.2% of all national parliaments. A mere 15 countries have achieved 30% or more representation of women in their national governments. While not parity, this percentage is nonetheless deemed “critical” — studies suggest that after reaching this threshold, women’s perspectives and interests will more likely be taken into account and pro-women legislation will more likely be adopted by the government.1

This gender disparity is lessening only very slowly, with the percentage of women legislators worldwide increasing a mere +0.5% per year. At this rate, global parity in national parliaments will not be achieved until the turn of the 22nd century.2

And in the UK…

Even though there are 118 women in the House of Commons, this constitutes just 18% of the 659 MPs at Westminster.7 Moreover, only one quarter of the highest level civil servants in Britain are women.8

The United Kingdom ranks only 51st in the world in women’s parliamentary representation. It is ahead of the United States, France and Italy, but behind the Scandinavian countries, Cuba, Spain, Argentina, South Africa and Bulgaria.9

And in nearly all areas of international policy-making…

Of the 159 trade policy experts selected in 1998 for the WTO roster of dispute (the body that settles trade-related disagreements) only 12 (7.5 %) were women.12 Of the country representatives who attended the fourth WTO Ministerial Conference, held in Doha, Qatar in November 2001, only 8.4% were women.13

At the IMF, women comprise 6.3% of alternates to the Board of Governors, and only 4.2% of alternates to the Board of Directors. At the World Bank, women comprise 9% of alternates to the Board of Governors, and only 16.7% of alternates to the Board of Directors.14

In the United Nation’s principal economic agency, UNCTAD, 31% of staff are women. However, at the higher levels, women’s representation declines and there are no women in the top four positions.15

And this gender disparity is evident even beyond the world of ‘politics’…

Of the UK’s 107 High Court judges, ten (9.35%) are women. Of the 433 District Court judges, 83 (19.2%) are women.16 Even though judicial positions were opened to women in 1919, the first woman law lord, Dame Brenda Hale, was only appointed in January 2004.17

According to the Cranfield Female FTSE Index, which tracks women’s representation among directors of the FTSE 100 companies, women held 101 directorships on the FTSE 100 boards in 2003. This was a milestone. Yet, 32 of the FTSE 100 boards still include no women members and the 101 directorships still represent a mere 8.6% of the total 1175 (up from 6.5% in 2001).18 Moreover, only 17 (3.7%) of the FTSE 100 Executive Directorships are held by women.19

Only 8% of senior police officers, 9% of top business leaders, 12% of local authority council leaders, 15% of university vice chancellors, and 9% of national newspaper editors in the UK are women.20


Participation in Decision Making


The traditional view of leadership, is based on assumptions of people’s powerlessness, their lack of personal vision and inability to master the forces of change, deficits which can be remedied only by a few great leaders. Against this traditional view there is a view of leadership that centres on subtler forms, participation, horizontal and systemic approach that focuses on mutual learning and contribution. There is argument that learning organizations provide a ground for new view of leadership. In a learning organization, leaders are designers, stewards and teachers. Here, for women there is capacity and space to engage in organisations’ leadership. In this view, participation in higher level of management means that women set their mind to question and challenge performance and plans, to engage in decision making process.

For political participation the main objectives are to achieve both equity and efficiency in government, to produce a government which is equitably responsive to all sections of the electorate. Thus incentives should be provided to the parties such that the government they form is responsive not merely to a majority of electors, but to all electors. There should be no disregarded minority, whose needs the government ignores. Each section of the electorate should have equal influence with the government, and get equal treatment from it. At the same time, these incentives to equal treatment should be provided in such a way as still to enable the government to be stable and effective.

Invariably, insufficient participation of women in higher political and social positions is the result of environmental and cultural factors rather than gender differences. Social conditioning does contribute to traditional gender roles to a great extend. And the resulting unfairness is deeply embedded in the structure of human society. We do need to be radicalized, to recognize and challenge the gender role injustices we are still too often blind to. It is inadequate to reply that many women don’t object to their restricted gender role. Limited experience may limit imagination and the desire for anything better. And people tend to adapt what they want to their deprived circumstances, to avoid the frustration of wanting what they cannot expect to get. Hence, coping with deficits in a rational way.

However, women can have great influence on decision makers in roles such as non-executive managers where there is opportunity to both support executives in their leadership and to monitor and control their conduct. In this concept both aspects of the role is carried out through strong and rigorous processes of accountability and engagement within the organisation. In practice, such accountability is achieved through a wide range of different behaviours – challenging, questioning, probing, discussing, testing, informing, debating and exploring – that are at the very heart of how non-executives seek to be effective across the spectrum of different managerial relationships and their strategic and monitoring roles.

There is too much to learn to find ways of achieving higher level of socio political participation and education in order to overcome the barriers and identify the opportunities particularly in the context where the impact of cultural socialization has resulted in women's inclination towards non management careers and positions. Questioning, challenge, explanation and debate form part of an ongoing dialogue that draws upon women experience of influencing and participating in higher level and to hold executives accountable. Within such processes of accountability women can constantly seek to establish and maintain their own confidence in the conduct of the organisation; the performance and behaviour of the executives, the development of strategy, the risk assessment. Involvements in strategy development and implementation, audit, and their role as a source of confidence and trust to stakeholders should be a continuous process if they are to gain support to fill up higher echelon of political, and social positions.





References:

1 Getting the Balance Right in National Parliaments. Fact sheet from the Women’s Environment and Development Organization [pdf]. Accessed 10 Nov 2004

2 Inglehart, Ronald and Pippa Norris. Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 129. Cites data from the Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2000.

3 Oxford University Student Union website. Accessed 10 Nov 2004.

4 University of Oxford Politics department website. Accessed 10 Nov 2004.

5 University of Oxford Law faculty website. Accessed 10 Nov 2004.

6 Oxford Union Society website. Accessed 10 Nov 2004.

7 Sex and Power: Who runs Britain? 2005 Report by the Equal Opportunities Commission [pdf]. Accessed 18 Jan 2005.

8 European Commission website on women and men in decision-making. Accessed 05 Dec 2004.

9 The other countries were Norway, Finland and France; www.terra.es/personal2/monolith/00women3.htm accessed 29 Nov 2004. The parliamentary statistics can be found at http://www.ipu.org/; accessed 29 Nov 2004.

10 European Women’s lobby. Accessed 05 Dec 2004.

11 European Commission website on women and men in decision-making. Accessed 05 Dec 2004.

12–15 Women’s Environment and Development Organization. Accessed 10 Nov 2004.

16 Department for Constitutional Affairs. Accessed 29 Nov 2004.

17 UK’s first woman law lord appointed. The Guardian article. Accessed 29 Nov 2004.

18, 19 The Cranfield School of Management Female FTSE Index 2003 report [pdf]. Accessed 29 Nov 2004.

20 Sex and Power: Who runs Britain? 2005 Report by the Equal Opportunities Commission [pdf]. Accessed 18 Jan 2005.

Oxford Women in Politics · c/o Department of Politics and International Relations · Manor Road · Oxford OX1 3UQ · United Kingdom