Download ILPS Conference paper

Constructing Women Leaders’ Identity
Ruth Sealy
Exeter University Business School, EX4 4PU, UK.
[email protected]
Leader emergence is a complex adaptive process (DeRue, 2011). To become a leader, a leadership identity
needs to be both internalised and recognised by others. According to DeRue and Ashford (2010), this involves
a set of relational and social processes that enable not only the leader to see her/himself as a leader, but for
others to accept her/him in that role. If leader roles are socially constructed, then the social context matters,
both to the identity development and effectiveness of the leader (Ibarra, Wittman, Petriglieri and Day, 2014).
The individual engages in identity work within their social context through which they “acquire, internalize and
validate a leader identity and refine, revise and enact their other identities so as to minimize conflict with the
leaders identity and maximise group prototypicality” (Epitropaki, Kark, Mainemelis and Lord, forthcoming,
p.8). DeRue and Ashford’s ‘claim and grant’ construction occurs within a social context which will have its own
ideologies about the characteristics of a leader (e.g. assertive, decisive, agentic, etc.) and these generally
gendered institutional biases will impact the identity work of potential women leaders (Ely, Ibarra and Kolb,
2011). Social role theory (Eagly and Karau, 2002) predicts that integrating leader identity with a self-concept as
a woman is problematic “in a culture that is deeply conflicted about her authority” (Ely and Rhode, 2010, cited
in Ibarra, et al. 2014, p.16). Considering the interplay of leadership identity development and gender
processes, what then is the process by which non-typical leaders emerge?
The lack of women leaders is a constant issue of concern for large organisations today and a myriad of wellintentioned HR initiatives appear to be having little effect on the numbers. Women in demographically
imbalanced work environments struggle with gender identities (Ely, 1994; Ely, et al., 2011) and many leave
before transitioning into senior leadership roles. Whilst much of the women’s leadership literature focuses on
the barriers and interpersonal challenges, there is little work on the intrapersonal processes and challenges
women face, developing and integrating a leader identity within the social context of large organisations,
which theory suggests would not be supportive (Ibarra, et al., 2014).
To develop ones leadership identity, individuals need “leadership schema, leadership experiences and future
representations of oneself as a leader” (Epitropaki, et al., forthcoming, p.4), in order to reduce the leader
identity uncertainty and increase leader salience. When it is salient, individuals may seek out more
developmental experiences in leadership, and so experience ‘leader-identity development spirals’ (Day,
Harrison and Halpin, 2009), strengthening salience and centrality of leader identity. Internalising the leader
identity is imperative for leadership development (Karelaia and Guillen, 2014), but this is both an introspective
and social process, as leadership is practiced and hopefully receives social validation of being within an
acceptable repertoire in the current context (Ibarra & Barbulescu, 2010).
Transitioning from a follower identity to a leader identity may also mean letting go of the former. Identity
transitions can be described as liminal spaces, ‘betwixt and between’ moments that enable transformations
(Beech 2010; Ladge, Clair & Greenberg, 2012; Turner 1967). Young women on graduate schemes in
professional service firms (PSF), having been the brightest and the best in an egalitarian education system, find
themselves not being given stretch roles (Sealy and Harman, 2017). They watch their male counterparts
navigate politically and assume leadership roles they themselves are not offered. At this point their role as
followers is often reinforced by gender role expectations and they begin to question their own beliefs about
leadership roles (Karelaia and Guillen, 2014). Organisations can intervene at this point with mentors or
sponsors to help support leadership identity development.
However, Karelaia and Guillen (2014) find that while positive leader identity can help with motivation towards
leadership, it does not help with the identity conflict between personal and professional roles that so many
women face. Positive gender identity and positive leader identity enables psychological well-being as well as
continued motivation to lead. In addition, “positive gender identity may reduce the perceived need to
suppress gender-typical behaviors and thereby diminish strain and fatigue resulting from the self-regulatory
processes” (Karelaia and Guillen, 2014, p.215). This may help women move away from prescriptive styles of
Ruth Sealy – Constructing women leaders’ identity – November 2016 – for IPLS conference
leadership towards a more authentic way of leading, thus integrating the leader role with their own values
(Ibarra et al., 2010; Karelaia and Guillen, 2014; Lord and Hall, 2005).
A more gender-balanced leadership demographic in an organisation can help with the positive construction of
gender identity (Ely, 1995; Sealy and Singh, 2010), allowing women to be more authentic and effective in their
professional roles. In cases of gender imbalance, support or training can help non-prototypical leaders (Eagly,
2005) as can psychologically safe spaces to try out their new identities (Kark, 2011). It is not only important
that a potential leader has a positive gender identity, but that they perceive organisational practices that
convey a positive regard of others for the social category of women – hence the value of senior female role
models (Sealy, 2010; Sealy and Singh, 2010). In professional service firms, potential leaders are given sponsors
to help with this transition and this role is particularly important for women. The sponsor plays an interesting
role as s/he is in some ways representative of the organisation, and also has a vested interest in the success of
the individual woman.
Proposed study
Whilst acknowledging conceptual developments in this area in the past few years, Epitropaki, et al.
(forthcoming) point to a need for further empirical research, particularly at the intrapersonal level of leader
identity development, in applied organisational settings, and using qualitative approaches.
This study aims to address that call, conducting qualitative interviews with women who have reached the
senior roles, focusing on how they successfully made the transition from management to leadership levels,
within a particular PSF. In addition, we will separately interview each woman’s sponsor to get their perspective
on the evolution and development of that woman leader’s identity. We have been in discussion with a
professional service firm who are keen to engage in this research, in order to further understand where to
direct their diversity interventions, thereby increasing their pool of senior female leaders.
Using timelines, career narratives, critical junctures, shocks and breaches, we will use process perspectives to
investigate how the sponsor helped create opportunities and provided psychological support, and how and
why the woman’s leader identity developed. For example, when identity breaches or value incongruences
were experienced, what were the things that helped the woman to recalibrate and stay on track? By
interviewing the dyad, we can see what they pay attention to, what are the synergies and differences? The
research will focus not only on the intrapersonal processes of a potential female leader, but also the dialogic
construction between the woman and the organisation, manifested by the sponsor. We are requesting 30
initial interviews (15 pairings of women plus sponsors). We intend the interviews to happen in Spring
(March/April) 2017. Initial findings should be available for the conference in May 2017.
References available on request.
Ruth Sealy – Constructing women leaders’ identity – November 2016 – for IPLS conference