What defines good leadership?

Despite making up an increasing proportion of the veterinary profession, women continue to be significantly underrepresented in leadership roles. Is this because women lack natural leadership skills or just the confidence to put themselves forward for them? Or perhaps the profession is in need of new working structures to accommodate female front-runners? This article examines women’s leadership skills and explores these issues.

What defines good leadership?

When I set out to write this article, I hoped to be able to identify a list of traits that research has identified to be common to good leadership and show that (obviously) women exude these qualities in abundance. However it’s clear that there is actually no set definition of a good leader. In fact, there are many different leadership styles, each being appropriate for different contexts. The culture of the organisation, nature of the task and the type of followers are just some of the variables which have an impact on whether a particular leadership style is appropriate.

Female leaders in veterinary medicine

Research, common sense and the tests of time have all proved that women can be effective leaders; their natural characteristics even lending themselves to certain types of leadership more than those of men.¹ Yet leadership is often still depicted primarily in masculine terms and when it comes to the leadership in the veterinary profession, men certainly still dominate.

The 2014 RCVS report demonstrates that despite the increasing numbers of female vets, the proportion working as sole principals was only 3.1 percent compared to 7.6 per cent for men; and similarly 2.8 percent of female vets were equity partners compared to 11.8 percent for men. Numbers of female directors were also dwarfed at a percentage of 6.5, compared to 24.5 for men. In contrast, the proportion of women working as ‘veterinary assistants’ was 70.7 percent – almost double the proportion of men.²

A look at leadership styles

While both men and women can be good leaders, it’s suggested there are gender differences in leadership style.³ To put these into context, here’s a brief overview of the main types of leadership.⁴

Democratic. A democratic leader is one who involves team members in decision-making processes although ultimately makes the final decision. This type of leadership often encourages creativity and is successful in engaging the team, leading to high job satisfaction and productivity.

Autocratic. Autocratic leaders tend to make decisions without consulting their team members, even if such input would be useful. This type of leadership can be appropriate when quick decisions are needed, when there’s no need for team input or when team agreement isn’t necessary for a successful outcome.

Transformational. This is often regarded as the best approach to leadership in the business context. Transformational leadership involves the leader establishing themselves as a role model, empowering subordinates and encouraging the team to develop their potential and therefore contribute more effectively. This is similar to charismatic leadership, the difference being that transformational leaders drive positive changes for their team, while leaders who rely on charisma are often more self-focussed.

Transactional. Transactional leaders clarify subordinates’ responsibilities, reward them for meeting objectives and correct them for failing to do so. As transactional leadership judges team members on performance, people who are ambitious or who are motivated by external rewards often thrive. However, it can impose limitations on creative or knowledge-based work.

Laissez-faire. This type of leadership gives team members freedom in how they do their work, providing support, resources and advice if needed. This autonomy can lead to high job satisfaction but can be damaging if team members don’t manage their time well, or if they don’t have the knowledge, skills, or self-motivation to do their work effectively.

How do men and women differ in leadership style?

Research has shown that female leaders, on average, are more democratic and participative than their male counterparts¹ and tend to assume more accommodative coalitions in pursuit of group performance and goal attainment, while men tend to be more exploitive, using coalitions to gain individual advantages.³ Women have also been shown to be more naturally adept at transformational management and are better at providing positive, reward-based incentives in transactional management.^4,5  Men, in contrast, seem to offer a larger measure of less effective and more negative, threat-based incentives.⁶ However, it should be noted that all of these differences are small and consistent with substantially overlapping distributions of men and women.

How does this relate to effectiveness?

It is tempting to jump from these positive findings to a conclusion about women’s superior effectiveness in leadership positions. However, the relationship is not a simple linear one and research on corporate performance in relation to the performance of its managers is mixed. However, women seem to lead in styles which correlate positively with effectiveness, while men’s natural leadership styles relate only weakly to effectiveness or even hinder effectiveness.⁶ Perhaps it’s not surprising therefore that many studies have demonstrated a correlation between a higher the percentage of women in managerial positions and a better financial outcome.^7,8,9

A related question is whether gender diversity within a leadership team has an effect on productivity. Again, results of studies are variable but many researchers have found a positive association between increased gender diversity and productivity.¹¹ Furthermore, gender diversity in a team is thought to promote cohesion and increase performance.¹²

Leading to the future

So what does this mean for our profession? It’s clear that both females and males possess the characteristics required for effective performance as managers so an increasingly feminised profession shouldn’t mean a dearth of business acumen or suitable candidates for these roles. However, women also tend to lack confidence in putting themselves forward¹³ in comparison to men and traditional duties of caring for a family still tend to lie with the female. Therefore it’s likely that the structure of the profession as it becomes increasingly feminised will need adapt in order to accommodate and support uptake of leadership positions by women in the future, without alienating men who contribute to the industry’s diversity.

What do other veterinary women think about their leadership roles and styles? What can the profession do to encourage women into leadership positions?

1. Eagly, A. H., & Johnson, B. T. (1990). Gender and leadership style: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 233-256. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.233
2. RCVS Facts 2014. Annual Report. http://www.rcvs.org.uk/publications/rcvs-facts-2014/?destination=%2Fpublications%2F
3. Chapman, J. Brad. “Comparison of male and female leadership styles.” Academy of Management Journal3 (1975): 645-650.
4. Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 569-591. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.4.569
5. Eagly, A. H. (2007). Female leadership advantage and disadvantage: resolving the contradictions. Psychology of women quarterly, 31(1), 1-12.
6. Judge, T. A., & Piccolo, R. F. (2004). Transformational and transactional leadership: A meta-analytic test of their relative validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 901–910
7. Carter, D. A., Simkins, B. J., & Simpson, W. G. (2003). Corporate governance, board diversity, and firm value. Financial Review, 38, 33–53. doi:10.1111/1540-6288.00034
8. Desvaux, G., Devillard-Hoellinger, S. & Baumgarten, P. (2007). Women matter: Gender diversity, a corporate perfor­mance driver. Paris, France: McKinsey & Company. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/locations/paris/home/ womenmatter/pdfs/Women_matter_oct2007_english.pdf
9. Dezsò, C. L., & Ross, D. G. (2012). Does female representation in top management improve firm performance? A panel data investigation. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 1072–1089. doi:10.1002/smj.1955
10. Campbell, Kevin, and Antonio Mínguez-Vera. “Gender diversity in the boardroom and firm financial performance.” Journal of business ethics3 (2008): 435-451.
11. Lee, Cynthia, and Jiing‐Lih Farh. “Joint effects of group efficacy and gender diversity on group cohesion and performance.” Applied Psychology1 (2004): 136-154.
12. Kirkwood, Jodyanne. “Is a lack of self-confidence hindering women entrepreneurs?.” International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship2 (2009): 118-133.