Women, Competition, and Relative Performance

I think until very recently, women were discouraged from being competitive, especially in environments against men. I think that the ambivalence associated with being a competitive woman still makes it difficult for women to pursue environments where risk is involved.

I agree with Emma. Women have been discouraged from exhibiting traits associated with competitiveness (assertiveness, desire to beat others and "win", confident swagger, etc!) while men have been encouraged. I read an excellent book called "Closing the Leadership Gap: Why Women Can and Must Help Run the World" by Marie Wilson which talked about how one reason that we are still far away from having a woman US President is that there are so few women "in the pipeline" to the presidency, because voters are so ambivalent about seeing women embody qualities of leadership (and perhaps competitiveness and authority as well). It would be interesting to know how much of women's attitudes toward competitiveness described in the Knowledge@Wharton article is due to nature and how much to nurture. Ah, the eternal question!

It will be the smart woman like Condi Rice who will exert her leadership qualities as a president, and gather her "John Wayne Men" around her who will both command their departments and protect her too. She is feminine, very womanly, strong, commands respect, a tiger when she has to be, and men would both protect her flanks and follow her lead at the same time. Now, this view would piss off the weakest feminist. Too bad. Geena Davis may not have the foreign policy smarts to carry Condi Rice's luggage. I'm a Republican, and in 08, if the Dems give it to Rice, I'd vote for her. Roger Futlon http://spaces.msn.com/members/rogerroost/

It is interesting that Emma and Ms. Mundell actually point out a significant difference between many men and most women. "Women have been discouraged from exhibiting traits associated with competitiveness (assertiveness, desire to beat others and "win", confident swagger, etc!) while men have been encouraged" A little hint from the male side ladies, men are discouraged to competing too. The difference is, that for many men, the first response is "Yea right buddy. You are going down!!" Every successful man that I know can relate some, if not many experiences where they came in to a new situation and the older more established person let them know subtly or overtly that they were not going to take there position. In every young mans life there comes a time when his father(Or father figure) says “You think you can take me? That will be the day.” Then one day you do for the first time and you establish your identity. Separate and individual. I know some women that also take this tack but far more should. You are capable, just don't be afraid to compete. Only the most un-evolved will resent you, and they are not worth worrying about. You will be more likely to gain respect. You will not always win but the competition will make us all stronger.

Yeah, we're raised differently, but we're wired differently too. I've been an engineer for 23 years now, and I promise you that the trash talking and screwing with each other that routinely goes on between the men about everything--project performance, monetary compensation, fantasy football--costs clients 10 minutes out of every hour worked. The women--both technical professional and admin staff--have their kvetching sessions too, but they're not as long or loud and rarely involve 5 or 6 people at a time. And they're not designed to disable like the men's sessions are. If "competing" means that I have to be profane, demeaning and combative about everything, then I am not going to compete. I will look them in the eye, out work and out perform them, and unhesitatingly tell them that I am doing so. But the rest of the deal is not going to happen.

Right on, sunny! Male or female - unrighteous actions are unrighteous. By the way, I work with a majority of women who are not necessarily as vulgar but do have "kvetching sessions" that are more numerous and lengthier than the male ones - I think that the environment and more importantly lack of consistent leadership (current and previous in one's life) is the key. Great leaders, great people (enduring legacies that prove the test of time and rigorous review) compete AND win with integrity which means none of what sunny describes but means only positive, uplifting aspects of competition (even in war where winning and losing is final, righteousness is/should be pursued like outlined in the Geneva convention). I would believe that Condi Rice who Roger Futlon identified as a winner with commanding and integrity-filled characteristics will prove to stay listed amongst individuals like Abraham Lincoln, Susan B. Anthony, John Wooden, Billie Jean King, Lou Holtz, Jack Welch, and many more. Winning is often times not as easy as a winning score and integrity is more so when righteous actions match righteous words consistently. Jack Welch said and acted upon such comments as, "Operate with integrity every day and go for it. Winning is good. Winning is very very good and don’t let anybody tell you it isn’t. When you win you can give back. You can give back to the community. You can give back to society." and, "G.E.’s core competency is people, we believe without question that the development of leaders and the development of high integrity-driven leaders is the winning way for one company." Every person should strive to compete and win with integrity if that person chooses to strive.

Before the general consensus becomes men are vulgar and profane and women just naturally rise above that, I've worked in an office in which I was the only man among 9 women. I've never heard such nasty, mean spirited, and embarrasing statements made openly in any office setting. Women in groups are much like men in groups... except their comments would probably make the men blush.

Women in the pipeline, so to speak, is at an all-time high in Congress and nationwide with women holding elected or appointed offices. First, we have 14 women in the Senate, none of them because of a death to a husband and thereby appointed to fill his seat, but elected by the people of Alaska, North Carolina, 2 from Maine, 2 from California. Michigan, Texas, Arkansas, New York, 2 from Washington and Louisanna. There are also 67 women in Congress, all elected. There are 8 female govenors, a mixture of Republicans and Democrats in Hawaii, Connecticutt, Delaware, Michigan, Kansas, Washington, Louisanna, and Arizona. Most of them gained some executive experience by being Lt. Gov, and even an Attorney General post helped train them to become leaders. Now, the Bush Administration also has the most women in key Cabinet posts as ever in history, Secretary of State, Labor Sec., Sec of Interior, and in the first term, a woman served as head of the EPA (also a former governor) and Ag. Sec. along with female advisors in the Justice Department and White House. Republicans also elected the first woman to hold a seat in Congress, from Montana in 1916, YES, it was 1916. So our nation has provided opportuntity for women to run, be elected, and not use a quota system to achieve some "equal as in 50% and 50%", but as equal in running to represent a state or a nation, the right of women to debate the issues for the people of our nation, and in 2008, it is my strong belief Condoleezza Rice will be our Republican candidate for president. As the national co-chair of a 4,000 strong group; the main motivation for me is that if I don't do this, and spend over $5000 of my own dollars to push this effort and work side-by-side with Dr. Richard Mason from Florida, the work will not get done over the next 2 years to build a base for Condi to run in 2008. Call it my competitive experience in sports, or my dedication to succeed in the classroom, or just the fact all the Republican guys being looked at in 2008 are not dynamic enough, energetic enough, or inspiring enough for me; whatever reason, it is a 2 year effort to put "The Eisenhower Plan" into action and chance the course of history. Our group also placed the first political adverisement on radio in Iowa in Feb. 2005, and the first political ads on "Commander in Chief" on Sept 25 in New Hampshire followed by October 18 in Iowa. We have used the internet to get our message out and now the mainstream media is reporting about the efforts of americansforrice.com, an all-volunteer group of private citizens.

As a non european woman in the US, I have immense respect for Condi Rice and can totally see her leading with her "john wayne men" watching her flanks, that's how it's done, no difference from Carly Fiorina or Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi et al Don said: I know some women that also take this tack but far more should. You are capable, just don't be afraid to compete. Only the most un-evolved will resent you, and they are not worth worrying about. You will be more likely to gain respect. You will not always win but the competition will make us all stronger. And I'd like to add what my advisor (john grimes at the Institute of Design) in grad school told me, "no, never hate the competition, always make friends with them, they are your real peers." or something to that effect. And it's true, Don, that I've found in my 15 years of working that only the most unevolved will resent you.

Great post. This information is especially relevant in the advertising and marketing field where performance issues between men and women were the subject of some unfortunate comments by the Executive CD at Ogilvy & Mather. I've added this post to my daily summary of important blog posts for marketing profesisonals at "Much Ado About Marketing." Thanks, Mike Bawden Brand Central Station