This book explores a central question: What if these two observationsāthat most leaders are bad and that most leaders are maleāare causally linked? In other words, would the prevalence of bad leadership decrease if fewer men, and more women, were in charge?
Related Quotes
I argued that the underrepresentation of women in leadership was not due to their lack of ability or motivation, but to our inability to detect incompetence in men. When men are considered for leadership positions, the same traits that predict their downfall are commonly mistakenāeven celebratedāas a sign of leadership potential or talent.
As this book will show, traits like overconfidence and self-absorption should be seen as red flags. But instead, they prompt us to say, āAh, thereās a charismatic fellow! Heās probably leadership material.ā The result in both business and politics is a surplus of incompetent men in charge, and this surplus reduces opportunities for competent peopleāwomen and menāwhile keeping the standards of leadership depressingly low.
Womenās paths to leadership are undoubtedly dotted with many barriers, including a very thick glass ceiling. But the more I have studied leaders and leadership, the more I believe that the much bigger problem is the lack of career obstacles for incompetent men.
Most notably, in a review of forty-five studies on leadership and gender, Alice Eagly, a professor at Northwestern University, and her colleagues found that women were more able to drive positive change in their teams and organizations than men were, not least because of womenās more effective leadership strategies.
Why men are more likely to be narcissists (sorry, guys, itās just science)