Reading through this my mind is just spinning with all these questions about why there aren't as many women in the upper crust of the work force. Is it because of education, and that from a young age women are taught that either it is unattainable or not where they belong? Is it because of biological differences, the same types of differences that could make it harder for women to get into high-level math and science careers? So many different topics come to mind in this massive amalgamation of a question. Are the barriers that hold women back from upper-level business positions societal in nature?
I think they absolutely are societal. Another influence I would point out is the tradition of men in the workplace. As Eagly and Carli explained, female managerial styles can actually be more effective than male managerial styles. However, I believe that our cultural history of men in the workplace has solidified that idea that the male managerial style is the correct one.
Along with that there are also numerous other forces that hold women back from advancing in the workforce. I think being a family caretaker is probably at the forefront of these issues. Women are more likely to take time off after having a child to care for it while men tend to stay at work earning the money to care for the child. This is not a new concept, but one that continues to hold even career-oriented women back.
I think to argue that these forces holding women back from high-level managerial positions are not societal is absurd.
1. Why do we as a culture have such a hard time adapting to new methods, such as female managerial styles?
2. Do you think there are just as many women as there are men vying for these high-level managerial positions?
No comments:
Post a Comment