Business needs to get away from promoting people whose only talents are stealing others' ideas and doing .ppt presentations, in favour of promoting people who can actually do something worthwhile.
sailor1031, 2010-06-06 20:40:37
The whole premise and perspective of this article is off. It has been clear for quite some time in the business world that upper level positions have been corrupted bastions of power and wealthy cliques with questionable performance and skills. As a result of performance analysis it has become clear over the past decade and a half that the way businesses have traditionally been run in our pseudo-modern society is inefficient, and counterproductive to healthy growth. There has been a movement away form top down structures that are slow to adapt to meet market pressures. It is clear flexibility is useful. There are some benefits to rigidity in certain industries but it is not generally a good thing, but far too many follow examples and figure if it worked for them it will work for me and totally disregard alternatives.
Most leaders are really copycat followers. They model themselves out of a successful example and aggressively force their way down our throats and regardless of whether the venture succeeds or fails they are never responsible. There was always something else responsible. They get their healthy buyouts and move on to the next elitist gig.
Gender has very little to do with anything. The factors that are significant are not related to gender but are more related to the individuals themselves. Attitudes of the entrenched primarily parasitic administration that takes more than they contribute out of a personal sense of entitlement either by virtue of their birth or having paid their imaginary dues and are deserving. These are people who resent and defend against any threat to their positions regardless of what gender the ladder climbers are. It has always been that way. Even males who not in the old boys club faced the same lock out from senior positions that you describe in context of challenges facing women. Men who didn't go to the right school. They didn't attend or don't belong to the right clubs, society... etc., etc. Much of what you attribute to the challenges facing females is not unique by gender, but your approach is an exclusionary and biased perspective.
Men and women who aspire to greatness / leadership are not the best leaders. The fact that a person aspires to positions of leadership and authority means they are more focused on themselves and less upon the venture they aspire to lead. The best leaders have leadership thrust upon them, but do not seek it. Any person regardless of gender who aspires to climb the ladder will display traits and adopt behaviours of the established clique to gain acceptance. They are motivated to climb the ladder so they will do what they perceive it takes. They are not forced to do or become any thing or be any particular wayt; they chose to do and or become what they perceive is going to get them where they think they belong. They are out to prove they deserve it and will do anything to achieve their aspirations. It isn't about being good leaders it is about gaining your spot amongst the corrupt cronies... breaking through to join the corrupt system as opposed to supplanting it.
The success you attribute to businesses that have changed their core values are not the result of the contribution of women. The pressure to change has been present in the market for a long time and failure of businesses to adapt meant their demise. It is a parallel not a cause and effect. The holistic model has penetrated every aspect of our society it is a broad movement that recognizes what is necessary for health. Health of people, health of business, health of anything you can imagine. This movement has little to do with gender and it is not reasonable to attribute the success of businesses adopting healthy balanced functional systems to female leaders. The opportunity came first and the right candidates to lead these enterprises in their newly minted directions (at least the established big wigs who are motivated to defend their profits and market shares scramble to adapt). The established organizations are likely to find more candidates that portray the different traits and skills in a different demographic than the traditional leadership pool. Since women make up 60% of college graduates they are more likely to occupy all positions in the future.
My experience with women has shown me that being a woman does not automatically make you a certain way or predispose certain characteristics. I know of a great deal of women who are naturally very aggressive and not at all nice just as I know of a great many men who are very nice. It has little to do with gender and everything to do with the type of people they are. The traditional masculine and feminine traits are poorly associated with gender and to perpetuate the stereotypical associations has little value. The asian concepts of Yin and Yang are better for observing the gender neutral aspects of these energies. People get in teh habit of using examples to express something bridges the gap of inexperience to impart meaning to others but instead of truly capturing the description as it is the associated example is far too often used as definitive. When the association no longer fits experience it no longer conveys the true meaning of what is intended to be described. Associating traits and energies with gender is not valid despite the habit.
Flawed intent. Flawed perspective making the entire intellectual creation of an issue and the perspective that validates it spurious at best and an exploitative rip off at worst.
The value of observation is to actually observe what is there and keep bias and limited perspectives out of it; or at least balanced. There is funding and money to be made in commentary and research on gender bias; so it appears valid, but falsely so. Certain men (and now certain women) are afforded the opportunity occupy the highest seats in organizations. We aren't talking equality of gender here. We are talking about the the recognition of females with the 'right' backgrounds and connections being given their place above the rest alongside the males with the 'right' background and connections. Not all men and all women being treated equally and afforded the same opportunities in business.
You could fill libraries with the stories of talented, hard-working men with exceptional leadership qualities / abilities who have been exploited in subservient roles and prevented from climbing any higher within organizations, but no one is going to pay for that research or to publish those stories; no one cares or wants to read them. It doesn't suit any ones particular agenda it doesn't incite; it doesn't generate interest and therefore income, but choose to isolate the women who face this harsh reality and all of a sudden it is remarkable and observant how women are forced to play a game stacked against them. Unjust and unfair... we must right this wrong perpetrated by men!
News flash. The game is stacked and has been stacked against everyone who isn't in the right clique. Exceptional talent rarely breaks through, but even if it does it is only in a limited capacity. The USs will forever be the USs and even the best of the THEMs will forever be the THEMs.
Your career and this story exists due the fact that if you look for something you WILL find it, but the facts may be that what you find is a distortion of the real facts in full and proper context.
Glad you can make a living distorting perspectives without really resolving the core issue. More reason why the more things change the more they stay the same. You aren't winning any victories for women in general just creating a broader group of elitists.
Ted, 2010-06-06 11:56:24
Sweet deals on used cars