Are women leaders better at building consensus than men?

When President Obama announced Elena Kagan as his nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, one of her strengths cited was her ability to build consensus.

I say this because there is a lot in management and business circles about a “female” way to lead.

The former Chilean President, Michelle Bachelet, says she indeed tried to lead through consensus, not by imposition.

Back in 2005, Caliper (a Princeton, New Jersey-based management consulting firm) and Aurora (a London-based organization) identified a number of characteristics that distinguish women leaders from men when it comes to qualities of leadership.

In general, women leaders:
• Are more assertive and persuasive
• Have a stronger need to get things done and are more willing to take risks than male leaders
• Are more empathetic and flexible, as well as stronger in interpersonal skills than their male counterparts
• Are better able to see situations accurately and take information in from all sides, meaning women leaders are better able to bring others around to their point of view

The Caliper study findings were summarized into four specific statements about the leadership qualities of women:

• They are more persuasive than their male counterparts.
• When feeling the sting of rejection, women leaders learn from adversity and carry on with an “I’ll show you” attitude.
• Women leaders demonstrate an inclusive, team-building leadership style of problem solving and decision making.
• Women leaders are more likely to ignore rules and take risks.

So … while President Obama may have been looking for a judicial ally, he was also aware that female leadership has qualities he no doubt wanted to see on the Court.

Whether or not the U.S. Congress agrees with him remains to be seen … although I suspect she will be confirmed (despite the fact that men heavily outnumber women in that branch of government!).

JS

Is uncertainty and confusion a good leadership strategy for small business?

While the credit markets are still tight for small business, it seems to me that the policy wonks have decided to lead with uncertainty …

What do I mean?

It seems that Team Obama’s leadership strategy, especially when it comes to business, is confusion.

One the one hand, the Administration is telling banks to lend more; on the other hand, federal regulators are telling banks to cut back on so-called “risky” loans.

On one hand, the Administration says it is “pro-business,” on the other hand it turns the other way as Congress threatened to call up executives to testify why they were following the law in telling shareholders how they would handle the new costs of health care compliance.

Unlike politicians, capital likes a certain degree of certainty in the business and finance “rules of the game.”

While the playing of politics makes for good drama, playing politics with the business environment creates a type of “political risk” that adds premiums onto capital’s required rates of return.

So while uncertainty does translate into “risk” … it’s not the type of risk that generates exceptional returns … (at least for business owners).

Jodie Shaw