Women as Managers

[Pat]

Jayzuz! Us picky (male) ones, well, we're acutely embarrassed by homophonous transgressions (holy crap, not even homophonous!). I wonder if Sheilas (sorry, just had to slot that one in after the last few posts) fair... err, phare... ummm phayre... hmmm no, fare... ah that's it...any better?

:

Don't be embarrassed Wayne, I'm not, even though I had to pull out a dictionary

 

[gav]

Gav, I'm quite surprised at how seriously this topic is being treated.
I posted the link just to promote some discussion. I didn't comment on whether I agreed with it.

It is simply factual to state that ASF is a male dominated environment.
Not sexist to say that.

And I'd be very surprised if anyone would contradict my suggestion that sexual harassment in the workplace has over the years been much more commonly generated by men.

Am I insecure as a woman? I don't think so. And I have never felt in the slightest disadvantaged in any job situation by my gender. I believe I've had the same opportunities as any male. I've also supervised and trained males as well as females and have found them equally responsive.

So I'd suggest you are reading into my attempts to provoke discussion attitudes which are not there. If I were anti-men, I wouldn't be interested in exchanging views on a multitude of subjects on this very website.

Wysiwyg, sorry I didn't comment on your suggestion earlier. Overall, I do agree, but I think there are some work environments where women's natural attributes enable them to be more effective managers, and ditto for men.

Julia, its hard to tell how serious someone is when they post something on a forum, especially when you dont know that person - so I apologise if my post was a bit harsh towards you. I guess the point I was trying to make is that I didnt understand why it was an issue, as long as the best person for the job was doing that job. I just find articles like that annoying. What about Jews, do they make better managers than Catholics? Or do white people make better managers than black? In general, there are traits that are more common to women, and traits that are more common to men. Just as there are traits common to different religions, and traits common to different races of people. Yet I dont see very many articles written about these...

As long as the manager is good at their job it shouldnt matter. And as for the "woman are good at home looking after the kids while the men are at war" comment, I have had women superiors in my time in the Army, and I'd name 2 of them in the top 5 people I have ever worked under, not bad considering females only make up around 10% of the Army.

 

[gav]

Ha!.......This from a "bodybuilder" I always thought they were insecure little men in big mens bodies.

Hahaha, well some bodybuilders are! : But I am not one of those. Comments like that are pretty common though, just like "well I know someone who is bigger/stronger than you", or "yeah but your on steroids"

I was 19yrs old and only 56KG when I started training. I just wanted to be bigger/stronger for work. But I got hooked, I just love the feeling I get from training. I do this for myself and no-one else. However as a bonus, it has helped wonders in the lady department Sorry, a bit off-topic there...

 

[Julia]

Julia, its hard to tell how serious someone is when they post something on a forum, especially when you dont know that person - so I apologise if my post was a bit harsh towards you.

That's very nice of you. Unnecessary though. Whenever we say anything on a public forum we have to expect to be able to defend it.
And yes, you're quite right, the typewritten word lacks the nuance of voice and body language and can create a quite incorrect impression.

I guess the point I was trying to make is that I didnt understand why it was an issue, as long as the best person for the job was doing that job. I just find articles like that annoying. What about Jews, do they make better managers than Catholics? Or do white people make better managers than black? In general, there are traits that are more common to women, and traits that are more common to men. Just as there are traits common to different religions, and traits common to different races of people. Yet I dont see very many articles written about these...

I see the point you are making, and yes of course it's about how well the job is done rather than who is doing it, but I guess given the difficulties women have had (and do still have to some extent in some fields) in achieving parity with men, there is justification for discussing strengths and weaknesses of each in management roles.

This is not intended to be patronising, but someone of your age probably doesn't know that not too many decades ago women couldn't get a mortgage without a male co-signing it. And a bit before that, women rarely had bank accounts in their own name without the co-signature of their husbands.
So this sort of background possibly explains why we have articles such as the one I posted.

Either that, or I am simply bored because I'm out of the market at present!

 

[Pat]

This is not intended to be patronising, but someone of your age probably doesn't know that not too many decades ago women couldn't get a mortgage without a male co-signing it. And a bit before that, women rarely had bank accounts in their own name without the co-signature of their husbands.

Must be quite a few decades ago, my single mother managed to get a mortgage in 1980 on her own....

 

[Julia]

Yes, Pat, I'd say it would have been the 70's when bank managers began to view women as creatures actually capable of running their own lives.

 

[nioka]

Yes, Pat, I'd say it would have been the 70's when bank managers began to view women as creatures actually capable of running their own lives.

My grandmother owned 2 hotels and other property which she used as a source of her own income from the early 1930s. I can personally remember her telling the bank manager what to do in 1952. He certainly got the message that she was capable of running her own life (and possibly his) at that encounter. It was up to the woman then as it is now.

 

[wayneL]

My grandmother owned 2 hotels and other property which she used as a source of her own income from the early 1930s. I can personally remember her telling the bank manager what to do in 1952. He certainly got the message that she was capable of running her own life (and possibly his) at that encounter. It was up to the woman then as it is now.

The difference is that women had to prove they could manage their affairs, whereas it was just presumed that men could do so.

Big difference.

 

[trainspotter]

Well, it's been 12 months since this one has seen the light of day and I reckon it is time we rehashed the outcomes due to the current situation we find ourselves in:

It seems to me that after the current global financial meltdown (with majority men managers in place) it would be better if the XY chromosone carriers gave way for the XX's.

A new university study has found profits are likely to rise under a female management team because women are more intuitive and can better suppress negative emotions.

The study, conducted by the Centre for Neuro psychology at Melbourne's Swinburne University, found women who had higher emotional intelligence and intuition were more likely to display good leadership traits.

Women were best able to articulate a clear vision for the future and could better control their feelings and understand the emotions of others.

So there you have it folks. Let the women do their thing and we men can take a back seat for awhile. It can't hurt afterall, look at the mess we are in now !

 

[pursuitute]

A new university study has found profits are likely to rise under a female management team because women are more intuitive and can better suppress negative emotions.

The study, conducted by the Centre for Neuro psychology at Melbourne's Swinburne University, found women who had higher emotional intelligence and intuition were more likely to display good leadership traits.

Women were best able to articulate a clear vision for the future and could better control their feelings and understand the emotions of others.

So there you have it folks. Let the women do their thing and we men can take a back seat for awhile. It can't hurt afterall, look at the mess we are in now !

YMBFJ (well, not you but the article re the bit in bold).

Here is truth:

Women can be good managers as they are well equipped to balance multiple disciplines to achieve a multitude of desired outcomes simultaneously. Women are great communicators in the worldly sense. Most women can process lots of information in an orderly fashion that leaves most men for dead. The myth that only women can multi-task is rubbish but I believe women have a real advantage in comprehending lots at once.

A fundamental disadvantage for women in the business world is that business is geared by men, for men.

I don't subscribe to the cries of the feminazis who say that men are exclusive of women in the workplace, but the business world is what has been created... by men.

Women, speaking very honestly, have sufficient skills to run most any business well. They have the natural ability to co-ordinate and deliver a result. What most lack is the comprehension of the environment in which they seek to flourish.

A smart woman needs to know when to shut her mouth.

The comment above would likely trigger all sorts of fallout in the feminist ranks but for those women smart enough, it will echo the learnings they have already made along the way.

Men conduct business in a very orderly fashion. Take your last meeting for example, man A speaks whilst everyone else listens, then man B has his turn. Each other male at the meeting listens and interjects at a socially acceptable pause or end of thought.

Each man digests what is being said by the sole speaker and responds accordingly. Pretty simple... and the meeting sounds well ordered. The exact same applies to men in social situations - one speaks, the rest listen.

Now think about the white noise a man hears when a group of women start talking in a social situation. Somehow, miraculously, every woman speaks at once (or close to) and everyone hears what has been said.

I believe it is bred into women (perhaps where there was 10 sitting around a fire cooking Pterodactyl) to function in a world that has a lot going on at once. Men on the other hand, were bred to focus on what's infront of them only, perhaps killing a tasty Diplodocus :.

A woman in a meeting full of men who tries to converse as she would normally do with other women will be viewed as a rude, impetuous scatterbrain by the men at the table. She may well know that she is across the conversation/s but men inately perceive her to be an idiot because she just interrupts and doesn't listen.

Finding women in business who conduct themselves like a man is rare but when I do happen upon one, I am very wary [for want of a better word]. If she's smart enough to know how to properly interact with a group of men and can reason in "man language" then she is no fool - and men will respond to her as a shrewd peer.

Leadership is another question and whilst women can make great managers, the opportunity for women to make great leaders is not quite so available yet. Maybe it's a man/ego thing but ultimately most men will trust other men to be right..... it's not sexist, when the status quo is what it is, it is what it is.

So, in this long winded post I am suggesting that YES, "man savvy" women are very well equipped to succeed in business. The only bit missing is the ability to figure stuff out..... if they start building decks we are all screwed