Harvard Business Review: Why Do So Many Incompetent Men Become Leaders?

[ehrnst]

There are three popular explanations for the clear under-representation of women in management, namely: (1) they are not capable; (2) they are not interested; (3) they are both interested and capable but unable to break the glass-ceiling: an invisible career barrier, based on prejudiced stereotypes, that prevents women from accessing the ranks of power. Conservatives and chauvinists tend to endorse the first; liberals and feminists prefer the third; and those somewhere in the middle are usually drawn to the second. But what if they all missed the big picture?

In my view, the main reason for the uneven management sex ratio is our inability to discern between confidence and competence. That is, because we (people in general) commonly misinterpret displays of confidence as a sign of competence, we are fooled into believing that men are better leaders than women. In other words, when it comes to leadership, the only advantage that men have over women (e.g., from Argentina to Norway and the USA to Japan) is the fact that manifestations of hubris — often masked as charisma or charm — are commonly mistaken for leadership potential, and that these occur much more frequently in men than in women.

This is consistent with the finding that leaderless groups have a natural tendency to elect self-centered, overconfident and narcissistic individuals as leaders, and that these personality characteristics are not equally common in men and women. In line, Freud argued that the psychological process of leadership occurs because a group of people — the followers — have replaced their own narcissistic tendencies with those of the leader, such that their love for the leader is a disguised form of self-love, or a substitute for their inability to love themselves. “Another person’s narcissism”, he said, “has a great attraction for those who have renounced part of their own… as if we envied them for maintaining a blissful state of mind.”

....................................................................................

In sum, there is no denying that women’s path to leadership positions is paved with many barriers including a very thick glass ceiling. But a much bigger problem is the lack of career obstacles for incompetent men, and the fact that we tend to equate leadership with the very psychological features that make the average man a more inept leader than the average woman. The result is a pathological system that rewards men for their incompetence while punishing women for their competence, to everybody’s detriment.

See also: The 2016 presidential election, from start to finish.


https://hbr.org/2013/08/why-do-so-many-incompetent-men

[dhol82]

1. I think most this can be ascribed to the Dunning-Kruger Effect

Many leaders don't have a clue how stupid they really are.

Also the Peter principle. Shit rises to the top.

[ehrnst]

2. Arrogance and complete confidence that you are the arbiter of what is "right"

being mistaken for "consistency" and "ethics" and the ability to listen and to adjust as evidence and the public's will became clearer as "shifty" and "corruptible"- explains so much about this election and what led up to it.

[dhol82]

3. True.

[smirkymonkey]

4. K&R

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

5. There plenty of women who are both competent and confident.

Hillary exuded both of these qualities. I don't think women aren't getting ahead because they lack self confidence. I think sexism is still a factor.

[ehrnst]

6. When she did listen and adjust her thinking with new evidence or data, she was called "shifty"

When she didn't apologize for her speaking fees, she was called craven and greedy.

If she would have dared to wag her finger and scold and yell, she would have been called much worse than "shrill."

[Zing Zing Zingbah]

7. Yup... Confident men get respect

and confident women get called bitches, which is disrespect.

[mercuryblues]

8. ohhh, I don't

know. Maybe you and other elite collages stop with the legacy admissions and diplomas? Call me crazy, but I think that is a good place to start.

[yardwork]

16. I'm not sure, but I believe more women than men are admitted into college.

[Jane Austin]

9. I think I know why, even without reading the article.

Based on my own experience, I'd say that incompetent men with a lot of, um, testosterone cover up their inadequacy with a lot of bullshit.

That gift of gab tends to dazzle people who are impressed by male prowess.

Those guys steal all the oxygen in the room, and everybody else fades into the background when compared to the big guy.

[HipChick]

10. And a buddy network...

[SharonAnn]

11. Yes, I found that to be often true in my career. Even as a conputer programmer

where you would think there is a very objective way to evaluate a person's competence.

Often the bullshitters just got themselves moved to a position where they "managed" people even though they completely failed at coding. And some of them were very good at covering that up.

[Thor_MN]

15. At my last job, that was my manager. Couldn't code himself out of wet kleenix.

Was big on buzzwords without really understanding them, hated my ideas until they were voiced by a coworker. Several meetings where I pointed out the correct way to fix something and repeated "No"s, until one of the other guys said the same damn thing and it was like they had invented sliced bread...

[Initech]

12. The people who vote republican are not capable of critical thinking.

They feed on a vicious cycle of fear, hate, and misinformation 24 hours a day. That's why they rely on TV and radio pundits and organizations like the NRA and the Heritage Foundation to tell them what they should be thinking about. And the GOP is anti education, and their destructive policies keep people ignorant on critical issues like the environment.

[shadowmayor]

13. Addendum

Why do so many incompetent leaders become Generals in our military?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

14. Research proves article's thesis is very applicable to Right Wing Authoritarians & RWA Followers

RWAF = Right Wing Authoritarian Followers

[NRaleighLiberal]

17. I worked in Big Pharma for 25 years. My observations....

I could write a thesis just based on what I saw. It was pretty awful, actually.

But some generalities that are applicable

Peter Principle for sure - lots of managers were elevated to a point just beyond where they should have been.

Poor understanding of true leadership, which was typically confused with management. The managers arrogantly forced their will (and often poor decisions). Leaders inspired you to do your best by creating a vision that one could buy into. I worked for few actual true leaders - perhaps one, and it was a woman (still a great friend, still going great things).

Most of the men managers I worked for were quite insecure and covered up for it by their arrogance. They also had no idea how to build diverse teams - they aimed for replicating themselves in every role. Instead of wanting to be challenged, they wanted to be agreed with.

Certainly the "old boys network" was alive and well throughout the company. It was pretty disgusting to observe actually.

Needless to say, I didn't progress very far or very fast - I called it like I saw it, refused to play the game, and challenged bad decision making.

When I think of the amazing talent that was squandered by poor leadership and poor management (the vast majority of which were men), it is staggering - the amount of money wasted.

Can you tell how happy I am to be retired???

[FairWinds]

18. Psychopaths are smart . .

and they can figure out how to play any

leadership game that you invent.

They are overwhelmingly men, but I've run into

some of the female persuasion too.

From those radicals at Forbes . .

https://www.forbes.com/sites/victorlipman/2013/04/25/the-disturbing-link-between-psychopathy-and-leadership/#4a4c1a454104