Negotiating Ambivalence: The Leadership of Professional Women’s Networks

Chapter
Part of the Issues in Business Ethics book series (IBET, volume 27)

Editors’ Introduction

A systems perspective allows us to question popular beliefs about what women need to do to develop as leaders, or common explanations for the limited number of women in top leadership positions. For instance, much of the literature on leadership argues that the most successful leaders are those who engage in networking, or those who develop binding relationships throughout an organization. Because women have fewer opportunities to network and fewer such organizations in which to participate, it is often concluded that the paucity of such opportunities explains why there are fewer women than men in leadership positions. Gremmen and Benschop question the conclusion that networks are always beneficial, and contend that some professional women’s networks are not enabling. The general conclusion to be drawn is that not all collaborative networks are successful, particularly those that revert to power struggles rather than collaboration. From a systemic perspective, the limited value of women’s networks can be explained by the fact that they operate amidst and in interaction with a variety of other networks and dynamics, which may undermine the role it plays in subtle ways.

Keywords

Gender Stereotype Business Case Upward Mobility Professional Network Critical Discourse Analysis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Acker, J. (1992). Gendering organizational theory. In A.J. Mills and P. Tancred (eds.), Gendering Organizational Analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage, pp. 248–260.Google Scholar
  2. Ainsworth, S. and C. Hardy (2004). Critical discourse analysis and identity: Why bother? Critical Discourse Studies 1(2):225–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alvesson, M. and Y.D. Billing (2000). Questioning the notion of feminine leadership: A critical perspective on the gender labelling of leadership. Gender, Work and Organization 7(3):144–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alvesson, M. and Y.D. Billing (2009). Understanding Gender and Organizations, 2nd edn. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  5. Benschop, Y. (2006). Of small steps and the longing for giant leaps. Research on the intersection of sex and gender within workplaces and organizations. In A.M. Konrad, P. Prasad and J.K. Pringle (eds.), Handbook of Workplace Diversity. London/Thousand Oaks, CA/New Delhi: Sage, pp. 273–298.Google Scholar
  6. Benschop, Y. (2009). The micro-politics of gendering in networking. Gender, Work and Organization 16(2):217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bierema, L. (2005). Women’s networks: A career development intervention or impediment? Human Resource Development International 8(2):207–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blackmore, J. (2006). Deconstructing diversity discourses in the field of educational management and leadership. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 34(2):181–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brass, D.J. (1985). Men’s and women’s networks – A study of interaction patterns and influence in an organization. Academy of Management Journal 28(2):327–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Broadbridge, A. and J. Hearn (2008). Gender and management: New directions in research and continuing patterns in practice. British Journal of Management 19:S38–S49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Burt, R.S. (1998). The gender of social capital. Rationality and Society 10(1):5–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Calás, M. and L. Smircich (2003). From the ‘woman’s point of view’ ten years later: Towards a feminist organization studies. In S. Clegg, C. Hardy, T.B. Lawrence and W.R. Nord (eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies, 2nd edn. London: Sage, pp. 284–346.Google Scholar
  13. Catalyst (1999). Creating Women’s Networks. New York, NY: Catalyst.Google Scholar
  14. Cialdini, R., R. Borden, A. Thorne, M.R. Walker, S. Freeman and L.R. Sloon (1976). Basking in reflected glory: Three (football) field studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 34(3):366–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Creed, W.E.D., M.A. Scully and J.R. Austin (2002). Clothes make the person? The tailoring of legitimating accounts and the social construction of identity. Organization Science 13(5):475–496.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cross, C. and C. Armstrong (2008). Understanding the role of networks in collective learning processes: The experiences of women. Advances in Developing Human Resources 10(4):1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Czarniawska, B. (1998). A Narrative Approach in Organization Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Ely, R. and I. Padavic (2007). A feminist analysis of organizational research on sex differences. Academy of Management Review 32(4):1121–1143.Google Scholar
  19. Ely, R. and D. Meyerson (2000). Advancing gender equity in organizations: The challenge and importance of maintaining a gender narrative. Organization 7(4):589–608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fairclough, N. and R. Wodak (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T.A. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction, vol. 2. London: Sage, pp. 258–284.Google Scholar
  21. Flap, H. and B. Völker (2004). Creation and Returns of Social Capital. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Fletcher, J.K. (1998). Disappearing Acts. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  23. Forret, M.L. and T.W. Dougherty (2001). Correlates of networking behavior for managerial and professional employees. Group & Organization Management 26(3):283–311.Google Scholar
  24. Forret, M.L. and T.W. Dougherty (2004). Networking behaviors and career outcomes: differences for men and women? Journal of Organizational Behavior 25(3):419–437.Google Scholar
  25. Fraser, N. (2009, March–April). Feminism, capitalism and the cunning of history. New Left Review 56:97–117.Google Scholar
  26. Ibarra (1992). Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Administrative Science Quarterly 37(3):422–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ibarra, H. (1993). Personal Networks of Women and Minorities in Management – a Conceptual-Framework. Academy of Management Review 18(1):56–87.Google Scholar
  28. Ibarra, H. (1997). Paving an alternative route: Gender differences in managerial networks. Social Psychology Quarterly 60(1):91–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ibarra, H., M. Kilduff and W. Tsai (2005). Zooming in and out: Connecting individuals and collectivities at the frontiers of organizational network research. Organization Science 16(4):359–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kanter, R.M. (1977). Men and Women of the Corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  31. Kilduff, M., W. Tsai and R. Hanke (2006). A paradigm too far? A dynamic stability reconsideration of the social network research program. Academy of Management Review 31(4):1031–1048.Google Scholar
  32. Kimmel, M. (2004). The Gendered Society, 2nd edn. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Krackhardt, D. (1990). Assessing the political landscape – structure, cognition and power in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly 35(2):342–369.Google Scholar
  34. Lorber, J. (2005). Gender Inequality. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.Google Scholar
  35. Mavin, S. and P. Bryans (2002). Academic women in the UK: Mainstreaming our experiences and networking for action. Gender & Education 14(3):235–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McGuire, G.M. (2002). Gender, race, and the shadow structure – A study of informal networks and inequality in a work organization. Gender & Society 16(3):303–322.Google Scholar
  37. Meyerson, D. (2003). Tempered radicals: How everyday leaders inspire change at work: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  38. Meyerson, D. (2001). Tempered Radicals. How People Use Difference to Inspire Change at Work. Boston, MA: Harvard School Press.Google Scholar
  39. Meyerson, D. and M. Scully (1995). Tempered radicalism and the politics of ambivalence and change. Organization Science 6(5):585–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Meyerson, D. and M. Scully (2003). Tempered radicalism: Changing the workplace from within. In R.J. Ely, E.G. Foldy, M.A. Scully(eds.); the Center for Gender in Organizations, Simmons School of Management, Simmons College, Reader in Gender, Work and Organization. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 266–272.Google Scholar
  41. Meyerson, D. and M. Tompkins (2007). Tempered radicals as institutional change agents. The case of advancing gender equity at the University of Michigan. Harvard Journal of Law and Gender 30(2):303–322.Google Scholar
  42. Parkhe, A., S. Wasserman and D. Ralston (2006). New frontiers in network theory development. Academy of Management Review 31(3):560–568.Google Scholar
  43. Phillips, N. and C. Hardy (1997). Managing multiple identities: Discourses, legitimacy and resources in the UK refugee system. Organization 4(2):159–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pini, B., K., Brown and C. Ryan (2004). Women-only networks as a strategy for change? A case study from local government. Women in Management Review 19(6):286–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Platform for Professional Women Networks (PfPWN) (2007). Guide for the Platform for Professional Women Networks. Amsterdam: PfPWN.Google Scholar
  46. Podolny, J.M. and J.N. Baron (1997). Resources and relationships: Social networks and mobility in the workplace. American Sociological Review 62(5):673–693.Google Scholar
  47. Scott, J.W. (1988). Deconstructing equality-versus-difference: Or, the uses of poststructuralist theory for feminism. Feminist Studies 14(1):33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Scott, D.B. (1996). Shattering the instrumental-expressive myth: The power of women’s networks in corporate government affairs. Gender and Society 10(3):232–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Singh, V., S. Vinnicombe and S. Kumra (2006). Women in formal corporate networks: An organizational citizenship perspective. Women in Management Review 21(6):458–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Sools, A., M. Van Engen and C. Baerveldt (2007). Gendered career-making practices: On ‘doing ambition’ or how managers discursively position themselves in a multinational corporation. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 80:413–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Van den Brink, M. (2009). Behind the Scenes of Science. Gender Practices in the Recruitment and Selection of Professors in the Netherlands. Nijmegen: Radboud University Nijmegen (dissertation).Google Scholar
  52. Van Emmerik, I.I.H. (2006). Gender differences in the creation of different types of social capital: A multilevel study. Social Networks 28(1):24–37.Google Scholar
  53. Vinnicombe, S., V. Singh and S. Kumra (2003). Making Good Connections: Best Practice for Women’s Corporate Networks. London: Cranfield School of Management and Opportunity Now.Google Scholar
  54. Zeijlstra, M. (2006) Ik ben niet anti-man. Delta 38(30), June 15th. (‘I am not anti-male’; Interview with the first leader of the Delft University of Technology professional women’s network)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Management ResearchRadboud University NijmegenNijmegenNetherlands
  2. 2.Nijmegen School of ManagementRadboud University NijmegenNijmegenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations