It is not a new fact that women are much better than men in organizational decision-making, and it is interesting when this conception shown by real data. Although men we know that men as number increase in corporate world today, in the other hand number of women in leadership positions is continued to rise over time due to their prowess when making decisions. While women are more good to the requests of others in stressful circumstances, men tend to become more egocentric – focus on themselves as opposed to compassionate and caring. Women’s can to offer reasonable decisions, especially when contending interests are at stake, turns them into better corporate leaders than men.
Are Women Better Decision Makers?
Gone are the days when women’s responsibilities were strictly on family affairs; they are now working even in traditional men’s roles. Women have turned boardrooms into competitive business discussion. Having many women as board members is not only the right thing that a company can ever do, but also the smartest thing that the company can do in the business world. Companies that have few female directors are perceived to be shortchanging investors and are insensitive on gender issues. Female directors are usually less constrained by rules, regulations, and customs; they are more innovative and adopt varied solutions for emergent problems.
Huston further contends that women tend to make effective decisions when under pressure. According to a study by neuroscientists, women’s work-rate is similar to men, but when under stress, women are excellent decision-makers. They tend to focus on other people’s needs with an aim of making everybody happy and satisfied. In a single experiment, a researcher asked individual participants to pick cards from some decks. Some cards were safe, offering recurrent but small rewards while others were risky and infrequent, offering big prizes. The researcher concluded that men who were stressed managed to draw 21% more cards from the decks that were risky, compared to the most women, thus, losing more at the end of the experiment. This proved that women are more averse to take risks when they are stressed.
The data sets utilized are sensible because data collection and analysis is a tedious process. Nevertheless, the data collected is inadequate to enable the drawing of conclusions about the field. Research that is more extensive is necessary to enable conclusions that are valid in the context of the field’s characteristics.
Women consider the interest brought forward by stakeholders rather than what the companies rules command about particular circumstances. They tend to cooperate well on matters of governance and investment. In addition, women are inclined to consult before making decisions and are always give more than one solution for every situation. Although with this abilities for corporate power, they can fit with almost any company’s environment. This is because this skill set is relevant and necessary in all types and forms of enterprises for industrial success.
Women are not risk-takers, but their openness in accepting other people’s ideas make them have more options to take, unlike men, who to take risks during financial crisis. Some people may have think the thought that having many women corporate management came with a cost during the global financial crisis that occurred in 2008. Its opposite, most companies that had women in their boards of directors matched their performance with companies that had all-male boards. In fact, companies that have women in their boards were not affected as much as those with all-men in the boards because women take low risk-taking activities.
Although women constitute less than 10% of corporate board members, their presence in the boardroom has been associated with excellent organizational performance, lower rates of efficient risk management, and high profit. However, the question that corporate should ask whether making women to become leaders will transform decision-making processes during stressful circumstances. Sometimes, organizations have to make risky decisions in order to survive the competitive war. Huston’s neglect of this aspect of leadership among men and women weakens her argument as it a critical dimension in the analysis of leadership between the two genders.
Women who find their way into boardrooms in large organizations usually do have their own risks. Men look at them as if they are thorns in men’s feet. Sometimes they hate to play the game that men play because they do not believe in themselves on charisma. They argue that men offer them little motivation to take leadership positions while women have managed to get jump success through persistence and commitment.
Conclusion
Women are realistically competent in making decisions even when under stress because they always empathize with others and avoid making wrong decisions in case they are stressed. Companies cannot expect women to be leading only when the situation is relatively stressful or under pressure. . It is appropriate for companies to allow more women in the board of directors to deal with situations before they get out of proportion. If corporate owners want to maintain their firms in business, they have to point out the people responsible for making the best decisions.