President George W. Bush has described himself as ‘the decider,’ but there is much more to modern leadership than that. Contemporary leaders need to use networks, to collaborate and to encourage participation in order to succeed. IBM’s CEO Samuel Palmisano has argued that a command-and-control style hampers the flow of information needed for the collaborative work of today’s multinational corporations.

In the past, to be successful leaders, women had to adopt a stereotypically ‘masculine’ style and to give up on being ‘nice’ — think Margaret Thatcher, the Iron Lady of British politics. But today, with the information revolution and democratisation demanding more participatory leadership, such sacrifices are no longer necessary. Still, as The Boston Globe’s Ellen Goodman has pointed out, “While Hillary has been positioned as a tough guy, Obama has become the Oprah candidate. It’s easy to talk in a woman’s voice if you are a man.”

According to the psychiatrist Arnold Ludwig, women still lag in leadership positions, holding only 5 per cent of top corporate positions worldwide, and a minority of positions in elected legislatures — ranging from 45 per cent in Sweden to 16 per cent in the United States. Ludwig also found that of the 1,941 people who ruled independent countries in the 20th century, only 27 of them were women, and half of those came to power as widows or daughters of a male ruler. Less than 1 per cent of all the 20th century’s rulers were women who gained power on their own. If we are now entering a woman’s world, why are females not doing better?

... contd.