“A woman is like a tea bag – you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water.”
It was management consultant Marilyn Loden who first created the term “glass ceiling”, referring to the invisible barrier to success that women often come up against in their careers. Whilst it was invented to apply to major economic organisations such as corporations, this term was later applied to other fields such as electoral politics. There may be a plethora of reasons why women face these barriers, however largely bosses may perceive women as having greater family-work conflicts and may subsequently view them as mismatched to their organisations. The glass ceiling still persists today, with less than 10% of executive directors at FTSE 100 companies being women, and only five women occupying the role of CEO in these organisations (fewer than the number of men called Dave). Anna Bird, acting chief executive of the Fawcett Society (an organisation campaigning for women’s rights) states: “Outdated stereotypes about men and women’s different roles in the workplace have an insidious effect on our cultural attitudes about who should do which jobs.”
But what happens when women break through the glass ceiling? Research by Ryan and Haslam demonstrates that whilst more women are now benefiting from high-profile positions, they are more likely than men to find themselves on a “glass cliff”, where their positions are risky or precarious. In a study examining the performance of FTSE 100 companies during a period of stock-market decline, companies who appointed women to their boards were more likely to have experienced consistently bad performance in the preceding five months than those who appointed men. Mulcahy & Linehan additionally demonstrated that there was a significant increase in gender diversity when company losses were ‘big’ and noted that there should be caution in celebrating an increase in gender diversity on boards without considering the precariousness of the company involved.
If women are more likely to be appointed to these positions in relatively problematic organisational circumstances, and the company is seen to underperform, this may further reinforce the stereotype that women are unable to be successful leaders. A lead article in The Times (Judge, 2003) titled: Women on the Board: Help or Hindrance? Noted that whilst more women are securing positions on company boards, “The triumphant march of women into the country’s boardrooms has wreaked havoc on companies’ performance and share prices.” (Judge, 2003, p.21). However, it is important to note that this relationship is not necessarily causal. It is equally likely that a company’s declining performance can trigger the appointment of women, rather than women leaders causing a decline in company performance.
But why are women being appointed to these positions in a time of crisis? Women may be seen to have particular traits and skills that allow them to manage well in these situations, demonstrated by the popular tea bag quote above. Additionally, companies may appoint women in an attempt to make dramatic changes and ‘risk’ altering the status quo in a time of crisis. However, the glass cliff phenomenon is also observed with ethnic minorities. It therefore seems that whilst there are multiple reasons for this phenomenon, the system partially sets women and indeed other minority groups up for failure. And even if the tea bag logic is the reason for women being appointed in a time of crisis, do women necessarily want to be dumped in hot water again and again? Thus, it is important to consider not only the quantity of women in leadership positions, but also the quality of leadership positions that women are offered.
If you’re interested in this topic, here are some useful articles to check out!
Boin, A., & Hart, P. T. (2003). Public leadership in times of crisis: mission impossible?. Public Administration Review, 63(5), 544-553.
Cook, A., & Glass, C. (2014). Above the glass ceiling: When are women and racial/ethnic minorities promoted to CEO?. Strategic Management Journal, 35(7), 1080-1089.
Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2003). The female leadership advantage: An evaluation of the evidence. The leadership quarterly, 14(6), 807-834.
Hoobler, J. M., Wayne, S. J., & Lemmon, G. (2009). Bosses’ perceptions of family-work conflict and women’s promotability: Glass ceiling effects. Academy of management journal, 52(5), 939-957.
Judge, E. (2003). Women on board: Help or hindrance. The Times, 11(21), 543-562.
Mulcahy, M., & Linehan, C. (2014). Females and precarious board positions: Further evidence of the glass cliff. British Journal of Management, 25(3), 425-438.
Ryan, M. K., & Haslam, S. A. (2005). The glass cliff: Evidence that women are over‐represented in precarious leadership positions. British Journal of management, 16(2), 81-90.
Ryan, M. K., Haslam, S. A., Morgenroth, T., Rink, F., Stoker, J., & Peters, K. (2016). Getting on top of the glass cliff: Reviewing a decade of evidence, explanations, and impact. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(3), 446-455.