Wei Zheng, Ronit Kark and Alyson Meister* say female leaders are faced with conflicting pressure to be warm and nice as well as competent and tough.
Photo: bowie15
A wealth of research shows that female leaders, much more than their male counterparts, face the need to be warm and nice (what society traditionally expects from women), as well as competent or tough (what society traditionally expects from men and leaders).
The problem is these qualities are often seen as opposites.
This creates a double bind for women leaders.
Carly Fiorina, the former CEO of HP, depicted it this way: “In the chat rooms around Silicon Valley, from the time I arrived until long after I left HP, I was routinely referred to as either a “bimbo” or a “bitch” — too soft or too hard, and presumptuous, besides.”
To alleviate this double bind, societal expectations — for what it means to be a woman and what it takes to lead — must change.
But until we get there, female executives still have to navigate these tensions.
We wanted to know how successful women do it, day-to-day, so we conducted extensive interviews with 64 senior women leaders, working in various industries.
We found four paradoxes, all stemming from the need to be both tough and nice.
We also identified five strategies they use to manage them.
Four balancing acts
Paradox 1: Demanding yet caring
The female executives we studied told us they must demand high performance from others, while also demonstrating that they care about them.
For example, Norma* recalled how, in a past project, her perseverance led to successful outcomes but also earned her some negative feedback: “I remember a program that … was a huge success … [but] I received feedback on being intimidating.”
“Would I get the same feedback if I were a man?”
Paradox 2: Authoritative yet participative
This paradox lies between asserting one’s competence and admitting one’s vulnerability and asking others to collaborate.
On the one hand, women leaders learned to project authoritativeness so as to be perceived as credible.
They learned to “toughen up,” “speak louder,” and “act decisively.”
On the other hand, to avoid being perceived as arrogant, they were also quick to acknowledge their own weaknesses and work with others.
Paradox 3: Advocating for themselves yet serving others
The third paradox involves meeting one’s needs and goals as well as others’.
Focusing too heavily on one side can cause serious trouble.
For example, Cameron told us how she would share her knowledge with others, only to later feel taken advantage of when they failed to reciprocate.
Paradox 4: Maintaining distance yet being approachable
Our study subjects sometimes struggled to be seen as leaders, separate from colleagues and team members, while also developing close relationships.
To generate respect, women leaders kept a distance from others, maintaining an impersonal “leadership presence” that was “professional,” “objective,” and “serious.”
But they noticed this could create impressions of being “stiff,” “ego-centric,” and “apathetic,” making it difficult to earn trust and commitment.
To bridge this, many explicitly and emphatically worked to convey the intimate human side of themselves, so they were instead seen as “accessible,” “warm,” “personable,” “friendly,” and “easy to connect with.”
Strategies for managing the tensions
Our findings suggest that to successfully navigate these paradoxes, women leaders first need to become aware of them, teasing out the different tensions rolled up into the nice/tough double bind.
Then, they can develop and customise a repertoire of strategies to manage.
We identified five:
Adapt to the situation
Most of our study subjects told us they demonstrate niceness and toughness in different situations, towards different audiences.
For example, to signal both distance and approachability, Melissa said: “I specifically don’t sit at the head of the table at certain times.”
“[It] depends on the meeting and the environment.”
“At certain times, I want to send the signal I’m just one of the team today, and other times I want to be very clear that I’m here to make a decision.”
Go in order
Another strategy is to be nice (or caring and collaborative) first, then tough (or demanding and directive).
First, you build relationships, establish trust, and engage people, and then you follow up with harder behaviour or language to challenge the status quo or achieve goals.
Ruth talked about an incident in which she pushed to shut down a project that some of her peers considered their “baby.”
She was able to do so without incurring resentment because she had first “invested a lot of time in developing strong collaborative relationships,” which was later helpful.
Look for win–wins
Many women we talked to focused on identifying opportunities where niceness and toughness converge — what they sometimes called a “win–win” strategy.
Be tough on tasks and soft on people
With this strategy, women leaders focused on simultaneously being nice to people and tough on tasks.
For example, Sally said: “I learned that we could vehemently disagree on an issue, and when we walked out of the room, we were friends.”
“I really came to see the importance of being able to separate [that] out.”
Reframe
We found that the leaders also tried to reframe what it meant to be nice and tough.
They focused on connecting the two and reinforcing positive associations.
This involved recasting behaviours that might be considered weaknesses as strengths.
For example, they described displays of vulnerability as reflecting inner confidence — feeling secure enough to comfortably reveal their own weaknesses.
Shannon explained, “I am very confident in saying ‘I don’t know the answer but I’m keen to find out’.”
Another approach was to frame assertive behaviours that others might find threatening as originating from genuine care.
For example, Lorraine, Jordan, and Norma described giving negative feedback or voicing disagreements as trying to help others.
In the long run, organisations and society must produce systematic change to alleviate conflicting expectations for women and additional hurdles for their leadership.
But as long as female executives face the double bind, they will need to find ways to manage it.
* All names have been changed
* Wei Zheng is a Professor of Management at the University of Wisconsin. Ronit Kark is a Professor of Leadership and Organisation Studies at Bar-Ilan University, Israel. Alyson Meister is an Assistant Professor of Leadership and Organisational Behaviour at the University of Los Andes, Colombia.
This article first appeared at hbr.org.
