What if it had been “Lehman Sisters”?
The New York Times reports that two separate studies showed that the companies in Europe and the US with the most women on their boards were more profitable than others. Although the studies don’t prove a causal relationship, a handful of investment firms like the Swiss Naissance Capital, have created funds to invest in companies with female senior executives.
Comparisons of male and female leadership styles show female managers to be more flexible and better at multi-tasking than men, as well as more collaborative, encouraging and intuitive. Harriet Harman, the British minister for women and equality, said that if it had been “Lehman Sisters” rather than Lehman Brothers, the company might have survived.
There is no shortage of theories as to why women make better managers. Mine is that women have not been in positions of power in business long enough for the cliché of the female manager to exist. Whereas men might feel that they need to act a certain way to lead, women may be more willing to experiment with different management styles. (Think of Michael Scott vs. Liz Lemon.)
Of course the benefit of a greater number of women in the boardroom might have more to do with the gender balance itself and less to do with the managerial superiority of either gender.
