The HBR article, "Women and the Vision Thing," helped connect some dots in my mind.

Before digging deeper, and sharing that connection, generally, I dislike the "findings" these types of studies provide. Specifically, I don't enjoy subjective data that leads to generalizations about people. We're discussing a subjective topic based on subjective data points to find an objective "answer." That doesn't add up. This type of academic work leads to unintended biases, especially when seen in respected publications like HBR and HBP.

"Over and over again in our discussions with women, we heard them take pride in their concrete, no-nonsense attitude and practical orientation toward everyday work problems. We were reminded of a comment made by Margaret Thatcher: If you want anything said, ask a man; If you want anything done, ask a woman." (Women and the Vision Thing)

The HBR article continued to illustrate how Hillary Clinton and "Anne Dumas" both leaned in heavily on their "effectiveness in the day-to-day handling of the job." Whereas Clinton's opponent, Barrack Obama, and Dumas's perceived opponent, her Chairman, are adept at wooing their audience with their storytelling. Dumas was even quoted sharing, "We are in danger today of being mesmerized by people who play with our reptilian brain. For me, it's manipulation." Wow.

The quote illustrates a commitment to logical reasoning rather than emotional reasoning. I hypothesize this leadership approach doesn't involve gender, but I am open to being persuaded otherwise. However, I'll hop on my soapbox and exclaim that people filter messages through their emotions first before ever considering logic. This is scientifically proven.

The especially intriguing part is that Dumas even acknowledged the reptilian brain and its importance in persuasive speech. Instead of adapting to what she logically knew was important, she would rather die on the logic hill. She treated leadership as either/or instead of both/and. Managing the polarity by partnering with her Chairman would've been most effective.

It was important for me to walk down that path to share the following idea- we're focusing on the wrong topic. Female or male is an obvious comparison to tackle. I don't believe we have the appropriate data points to conclude who is more likely to be a visionary leader. Suppose we were to draw a connection between people who identify as emotional, logical, or both. In that case, we could draw an accurate understanding of where successful visionary leadership is found.

I don't know if there is a difference between men and women related to visionary leadership. I imagine that there is because the female and male life experience is vastly different. Pressures inevitably exist on how each sex is perceived, which may alter how an individual chooses to lead- visionary or otherwise. I'm comfortable with not having a definitive opinion on something subjective.

Herminia Ibarra and Otilia Obodaru's "Women and the Vision Thing" (2008)

Kate Ludeman and Eddie Erlandson's Book, "Alpha Male Syndrome" - Chapter 4 (2006)

Posted 4/1/2021