Indeed, a larger than expected number of those in leadership roles are incompetent, be that in business, politics or any other walk of life, even perhaps in religion, and the vast majority of them are men.
Dr George John
“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world is the stupid are
cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt” – Bertrand Russell.
If we want to improve the competence of people in leadership positions, we need
to first improve our own competence in selecting and judging them. Statistical
analysis confirms the lay opinion that there are more male leaders than female,
suggesting men are typically more deceived into believing their talents than
women. Unsurprisingly, men are also more likely to succeed in their careers. The
first rule of fooling other people into thinking you’re better than you are is to fool
yourself first. Indeed, a larger than expected number of those in leadership roles
are incompetent, be that in business, politics or any other walk of life, even
perhaps in religion, and the vast majority of them are men. As a rule, people in
general seem unable to distinguish between confidence and competence. In any
area of talent, there is an overlap between the two. Secondly, most of us love
people with charisma, but there is a difference between effective leadership and
simply being charming and good-looking. It is also true that even in the digital
age, there is a rise in the allure of narcissistic individuals.
In the convoluted realm of leadership, a perplexing phenomenon persists, which
is the prevalence of incompetent men in positions of power. This inquiry seeks to
unravel the intricate web of gender inequality and gender injustice that
underpins this idea of disparity, drawing upon an array of scholarly research
from diverse disciplines and cultural contexts. The entrenchment of gender
inequality within leadership roles constitutes a multifaceted issue that demands
a thorough examination of its underlying causes and its pervasive effects.
Adrian Furnham and colleagues’s groundbreaking study sheds light on a cultural
dichotomy where male hubris intersects with female humility. Across various
societies, ingrained gender norms often bolster men with unwarranted
confidence while simultaneously stifling the assertiveness of women. Furnham’s
exploration of cultural dynamics offers invaluable insights into ways in which
societal norms perpetuate the disproportionate representation of men in
leadership positions. Their findings underscore a troubling reality: while men
are often encouraged to exhibit confidence and assertiveness, women frequently
face societal pressure to conform to traditional gender roles, which may
inadvertently impede their advancement into leadership roles.
Furnham and colleagues’ findings are further corroborated by research from
Ohio State University, which suggests that narcissistic tendencies, commonly
observed in men, can facilitate their ascent to leadership positions. Ohio State
University’s research on narcissism further elucidates the complex interplay
between personality traits and leadership’s emergence. The findings of their
study suggest that individuals with narcissistic tendencies, characterised by an
inflated sense of self-importance and lack of empathy, are more likely to assume
leadership roles. This phenomenon, often observed in men, highlights the
detrimental impact of toxic masculinity on organisational leadership and
underscores the need for a more nuanced understanding of leadership qualities
beyond traditional gender norms.
Pretty much everywhere in the world, men tend to think that they are smarter
than women. This has been highlighted in Sophie von Stumm’s nuanced analysis
which delves into the complexities of self-estimations of intelligence, revealing a
tangled interplay between societal constructs and individual perceptions.
Women, burdened by societal expectations and gendered stereotypes, frequently
underestimate their own intellectual capabilities, thereby exacerbating the
leadership gap. This self-estimation of intelligence adds another layer of
complexity by highlighting the role of individual perceptions in shaping
leadership outcomes. Women, who are socialised to downplay their
achievements and intellectual abilities, may be less likely to assert themselves in
leadership contexts, again contributing to the perpetuation of gender disparities
in leadership roles. This internalised sense of inferiority, rooted in societal
expectations, poses a formidable barrier to women’s advancement and must be
addressed through targeted interventions aimed at promoting self-confidence
and self-efficacy.
The pivotal role of emotional intelligence in effective leadership is another key
aspect and this has been studied in detail by S Y H Hur and colleagues. Prevailing
societal norms often relegate emotional intelligence as a feminine trait,
perpetuating the myth of male invincibility, in which Hur and colleagues’ work
offers a glimmer of hope. They showed that there is a potential pathway for
breaking down gender barriers and fostering more inclusive leadership
environments. However, there needs to be a paradigm shift in our understanding
of the association of femininity with emotional intelligence for changes in
entrenched attitudes to occur more widely. There needs to be a wider
understanding of the reality that empathy, compassion, and interpersonal skills
are human qualities irrespective of gender.
The truth that women are more sensitive, possess a greater degree of qualities of
humility, and are more considerate, is perhaps one of the least counterintuitive
facts. Paul T Costa Jr and colleagues in a large cross-cultural study across 26
different cultures have demonstrated that fact, while at the same time
challenging conventional notions. And contrary to prevailing stereotypes, they
showed that women exhibit commendable leadership qualities. This debunks the
fallacy that leadership prowess is inherent predominantly to the masculine
gender. This cross-cultural perspective, which is now accepted as a fact, serves
as a powerful reminder that women possess wide-ranging leadership strengths
and capabilities that are essential for organisational success.
Meanwhile, Blaine Gladdis and Jeff Foster’s meta-analysis delves into the dark
side of leadership, where toxic traits thrive amidst the corridors of power. While
malevolent leadership behaviours transcend gender, societal biases often shield
incompetent male leaders from scrutiny, perpetuating the cycle of gender
injustice. Even when it has been demonstrated that negative behaviours may
manifest in individuals of either gender, societal biases and stereotypes, afford
greater leniency to men, allowing them to evade accountability for their actions.
This perpetuates a culture of impunity that not only undermines organisational
integrity but also contributes to the perpetuation of gender disparities by
reinforcing the perception that men are natural leaders. It has been conclusively
shown, by the world expert on the incompetence of men in leadership, Tomas
Chamorro-Premuzic, of University College, London, that when compared to
women, men are consistently more arrogant, manipulative, and risk-prone.
Furthermore, Alice Eagly and Blair Johnson undertook another meta-analytical
study which further underscores the gendered nature of leadership styles.
Despite clear evidence that there are diverse approaches to leadership,
masculine stereotypes persist, hindering women’s ascent to leadership positions.
Masculine leadership stereotypes, continue to dominate our collective
imaginations, relegating women to the margins of leadership discourse. This
kind of narrow conception of leadership, not only limits women’s opportunities
for advancement but also stifles organisational innovation and creativity by
overlooking the unique perspectives and insights they bring to the table.
In this crucible, the tendrils of gender injustice intricately weave a complex
tapestry entwined with cultural norms, societal expectations, and individual
perceptions. The lexicon of leadership, historically dominated by masculine
rhetoric, necessitates the need for a profound metamorphosis of attitudes to
occur, embracing diversity and inclusivity. As we confront the entrenched
gender biases that perpetuate the status quo, we must seize the opportunity to
cultivate a leadership landscape where competence eclipses gender, heralding a
new era of equality and excellence.
Quid pro quo, the onus lies on society to dismantle the patriarchal scaffolding.
Carpe diem, the opportunity has to be seized to cultivate a leadership landscape,
where a long saga of mostly incompetent men only in leadership, can be
challenged, paving the way to a more enlightened and equitable leadership
paradigm, forging a future in which meritocracy will reign supreme.
