Leading differently:
the power of women's leadership (Sept 2025)

Introduction

"Women should be more masculine to succeed." This statement, famously articulated by Donald Trump, reflects a persistent belief that has shaped workplace culture since women entered the workforce. Yet this notion - that women must conform to masculine leadership norms to succeed - warrants critical examination.

​

The question is not whether this view makes us uncomfortable, but whether it reflects reality or perpetuates a limiting framework that organisations can no longer afford. Drawing on empirical research, organisational psychology, and my own experience as a psychologist, coach, and finance executive, this piece examines the distinct strengths women bring to leadership and why leveraging these differences is essential - not just for women, but for men and organisations everywhere.

​

The barriers that women face

Before exploring how women lead differently, we must acknowledge what holds them back. Internal barriers such as imposter syndrome, persistent self-doubt, and perfectionism disproportionately affect women in leadership roles. While these challenges are not unique to women, research consistently demonstrates they are far more prevalent among female leaders than their male counterparts.

​

Several research-backed themes explain this dynamic:

​

Imposter syndrome and the confidence gap: women leaders often experience persistent self-doubt even when highly qualified and capable. First documented by Clance and Imes (1978) in their landmark study of high-achieving women, imposter syndrome describes the internal experience of believing oneself to be an intellectual fraud despite evidence of competence. This doubt is amplified by societal expectations and structural barriers that condition women to seek perfection or feel "not enough" relative to male counterparts.

Research consistently documents this pattern. In educational settings, boys are more likely to raise their hands in class even when girls know the answer or outperform them academically (Correll, 2001). These boys become men who back themselves and rate their own performance up to 33% higher than equally performing women (Kay & Shipman, 2014). The result is hesitation to pursue new opportunities, a tendency to downplay achievements, and over-preparation to "earn" legitimacy - behaviours that sap energy and vibrancy.

​

Reduced visibility and voice: self-doubt leads to reluctance in self-advocacy, decreased participation in key discussions, and passing on stretch assignments or leadership opportunities. This restricts not only career progression but also the chance to fully express one's unique leadership style, fuelling further cycles of under-recognition.

​

Perfectionism and burnout: many women are socialised to meet higher standards and face more scrutiny in leadership roles (Hewlett, 2007). This drives perfectionism, creates stress, increases fear of failure, and can lead to burnout, further impacting vibrancy and capacity for sustained leadership.

Isolation: Internal self-doubt can trigger isolation, with women less inclined to seek help, mentorship, or peer support - vital sources for building resilience and confidence. This sense of being "the only one" struggling increases vulnerability to setbacks.

Social expectations and workplace norms amplify these feelings, encouraging women to over-prepare, downplay achievements, and hesitate to seek opportunities. These cycles undermine confidence, agency, and visible engagement, and can lead to stress and burnout.

However, research consistently shows that when women name these barriers, challenge them, and embrace their natural leadership styles, they unlock greater resilience, authentic leadership, and improved outcomes (New Research: Women More Effective Than Men In All Leadership Measures, n.d.).

Six distinctive perspectives in women's leadership

​

Women lead differently due to six key perspectives, each supported by empirical evidence:

1. Values-driven, purpose-led orientation

Women leaders consistently articulate and align their work with deeper values and purpose. Large meta-analyses demonstrate that women in leadership prioritize connecting their work to meaning, ethics, and team wellbeing over pure profit or status (Sarwar et al., 2023). This care-oriented approach to leadership, first theorized by Gilligan (1982) in her groundbreaking work on women's moral development, emphasizes responsibility and relationship over abstract principles of justice.

​

This orientation energises teams and sustains leaders, creating cultures that nurture engagement and long-term success. Contemporary research by Brown (2018) demonstrates that values-based, vulnerable leadership creates more engaged and innovative organizational cultures.

2. Relational and collaborative leadership

Women excel at building trust, open communication, and authentic relationships. Numerous studies, including cross-industry organisational analyses, find that female leaders are more likely to foster collaboration, inclusion, and psychological safety (Edmondson, 2018). Teams led by women report higher engagement and satisfaction (Benefits of Female Leadership in Organisations - Impact Consulting, 2022).

​

One landmark meta-analytic study found that female leaders score significantly higher than men on transformational leadership - inspiring motivation, nurturing individual growth, and providing intellectual stimulation (Eagly et al., 2003). These transformational qualities, extensively documented in leadership research (Bass & Riggio, 2006), drive both team performance and individual fulfilment. Rosener's (1990) influential Harvard Business Review article identified this "interactive leadership" style as a distinctive advantage women bring to organisations.

Recent studies confirm that transformational leadership is tightly connected to emotional intelligence and communality - traits where women tend to excel (Bar-On, 2006; Goleman, 1998). Meta-analytic research demonstrates that women score higher on interpersonal dimensions of job performance (Luhaorg & Church, 1998). These strengths manifest in practices like mentoring, supporting, and championing others, which have positive ripple effects throughout organisations.

3. Whole-system perspective

Building on strong relational skills, women often approach leadership with a systemic mindset, viewing people and teams as interconnected. Helgesen's (1995) research on women's leadership identified a distinctive "web of inclusion" structure, contrasting with traditional hierarchical models. Women leaders see people, teams, stakeholders, and environment as interconnected systems, applying principles of systems thinking (Senge, 2006) more naturally to organisational contexts.

Particularly in fields like education and healthcare, female leaders consider decisions in terms of their broader impact on stakeholders and society, fostering cultures of ethical accountability and sustainable impact. They consider the broader effects of their decisions, which fosters ethical accountability and sustainable impact.

4. Resilience and adaptability

Despite facing higher scrutiny and adversity in leadership roles, research routinely documents women's capacity to rebound from setbacks, adapt quickly, and sustain energy during periods of change (How Organisations Benefit from Women's Leadership Styles, n.d.). Longitudinal research demonstrates that women develop distinctive resilience strategies throughout the lifespan (Werner & Smith, 2001), with particular strength in emotion regulation (Nolen-Hoeksema, 2012).

​

Evidence shows that under certain stressful circumstances - including chronic pain, survival in extreme hardship, and childbirth - women demonstrate greater resilience than men. In leadership contexts, this translates to an enhanced capacity to adapt quickly, rebound from setbacks, and maintain energy during periods of change (Southwick & Charney, 2012)- all essential components of effective leadership and key tenets of transformational leadership central to thriving organisations.

​

5. Evidence-based, learning-oriented practice

Female leaders deeply value continuous learning and constructive feedback. Research shows that women transform self-doubt into curiosity—a drive to seek new information, challenge norms, and prioritize practical solutions (Hernewstandstg, 2021). This approach leads to more innovative, flexible, and resilient organisations.

Neurological research provides additional insight: MRI scans demonstrate that when listening, women use both hemispheres of the brain while men primarily use one to process speech (Ingalhalikar et al., 2014; Luders et al., 2014). This enhanced listening capacity, supported by stronger interhemispheric connections in female brains, forms the basis for deeper learning.

​

Combined with higher levels of empathy and reduced fear of vulnerability (Goleman, 1998), women leaders create environments where evidence-based practice and continuous improvement flourish. Listening is the basis of learning, and women leaders leverage this biological advantage alongside their socialised strengths in empathy to build learning organisations.

​

6. Sustainable, practical change

Finally, women leaders emphasise habits and strategies that create long-lasting, practical, sustainable impact. They focus not merely on short-term wins but on building systems and cultures where wellbeing, engagement, and vibrancy endure (Eagly et al., 2003).

​

Research demonstrates that women directors are more stakeholder-oriented while men tend toward shareholder primacy (Adams & Funk, 2012). Nielsen and Huse (2010) found that women on boards ask more questions and consider long-term implications more consistently than their male counterparts. This approach ensures that organizational improvements persist beyond individual initiatives or leadership tenures.

The Oorganisational imperative​

The empirical evidence is unequivocal: suppressing women's unique leadership traits or pushing conformity toward traditional masculine norms means organisations forfeit vital strengths.

​

Financial performance: women in leadership roles have been found to increase the financial performance of organisations. Research from Harvard Business Review (2021) demonstrated that benefits are even greater when women occupy C-suite positions. This finding is corroborated by large-scale research documenting that companies with more women board directors significantly outperform those without (Catalyst, 2011). McKinsey's comprehensive 2020 study, Diversity Wins, analysed thousands of companies and found that gender diversity in executive teams correlates with outperformance. Credit Suisse's (2016) analysis of 3,000 companies globally showed consistent patterns of superior financial returns.

​

Meta-analytic evidence synthesizing decades of research confirms that female board representation is positively related to financial returns (Post & Byron, 2015). Impressive achievements under women-led executive teams include increased profitability, openness to change, and more measured risk-taking.

Innovation and resilience: companies and teams with more female leaders are found to be more innovative and resilient. Leadership styles where women excel - particularly transformational elements - are linked with leader effectiveness across multiple contexts and industries.

Ethical culture: women tend to enact more supportive and ethical leadership, fostering cultures of compassion and integrity—values essential in contemporary organizational contexts and increasingly demanded by stakeholders, employees, and society.

​

Practical applications

Translating this research into practice requires intentional action from both women and men:

For women:

• Recognize that difference is strength. Lean into values-driven, relational, and systemic approaches while also actively seeking opportunities and visibility.

• Transform self-doubt into curiosity. Seek feedback, build diverse networks, and embrace vulnerability as a leadership asset, as Brown (2018) demonstrates in her research on courageous leadership.

• Advocate for sustainable change. Acknowledge incremental progress while pushing for systemic transformation.

For men:

• Challenge bias toward masculine leadership traits - both internally and in organisational systems. Recognise that effectiveness comes in multiple forms.

• Amplify women's contributions. Ensure women's ideas receive appropriate credit and visibility in meetings, presentations, and advancement discussions.

• Create genuine leadership opportunities for women. Invite women to shape decisions, not merely to participate.

• Engage in active sponsorship and mentorship with intentionality, as Hewlett (2007) demonstrates this is critical for women's career advancement.

For organisations:

• Design evaluation systems that value transformational leadership qualities alongside traditional metrics, recognising the full spectrum of effective leadership behaviours identified in research (Bass & Riggio, 2006).

• Create pathways that recognise and reward relational, systemic, and values-driven leadership contributions to organizational success.

• Mentor both boys and girls, men and women, with explicit attention to developing diverse leadership capacities and challenging gender-based assumptions about effective leadership.

Conclusion

The notion that women must become more masculine to succeed reflects an outdated framework that limits both individual potential and organisational capacity. Women's leadership - characterized by values-driven orientation, relational excellence, whole-system thinking, resilience, evidence-based practice, and sustainable change - creates healthier, stronger, and more vibrant organisations.

​

The challenge before us is not to help women conform to existing norms, but to transform those norms to leverage the full spectrum of human capability. When we champion these strengths in ourselves and others, we connect, we build resilience, drive innovation, and we unlock lasting collective success.

​

This piece was the basis of my talk at the Speak & Shine Summit on 24 September 2025.

References

Adams, R. B., & Funk, P. (2012). Beyond the glass ceiling: Does gender matter? Management Science, 58(2), 219-235.

Bar-On, R. (2006). The Bar-On model of emotional-social intelligence (ESI). Psicothema, 18, 13-25.

Bass, B. M., & Riggio, R. E. (2006). Transformational leadership (2nd ed.). Psychology Press.

Benefits of Female Leadership in Organisations - Impact Consulting. (2022).

Brown, B. (2018). Dare to lead: Brave work, tough conversations, whole hearts. Random House.

Catalyst. (2011). The bottom line: Corporate performance and women's representation on boards (2004–2008). Catalyst.

Clance, P. R., & Imes, S. A. (1978). The imposter phenomenon in high achieving women: Dynamics and therapeutic intervention. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research & Practice, 15(3), 241-247.

Correll, S. J. (2001). Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments. American Journal of Sociology, 106(6), 1691-1730.

Credit Suisse Research Institute. (2016). The CS Gender 3000: The reward for change. Credit Suisse.

Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational, transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 569-591.

Edmondson, A. C. (2018). The fearless organization: Creating psychological safety in the workplace for learning, innovation, and growth. Wiley.

Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women's development. Harvard University Press.

Goleman, D. (1998). What makes a leader? Harvard Business Review, 76(6), 93-102.

Helgesen, S. (1995). The female advantage: Women's ways of leadership. Doubleday.

hernewstandstg. (2021). [Evidence-based leadership and women's learning orientation].

Hewlett, S. A. (2007). Off-ramps and on-ramps: Keeping talented women on the road to success. Harvard Business Review, 85(3), 43-54.

How Organisations Benefit from Women's Leadership Styles. (n.d.).

Ingalhalikar, M., Smith, A., Parker, D., et al. (2014). Sex differences in the structural connectome of the human brain. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(2), 823-828.

Kay, K., & Shipman, C. (2014). The confidence gap. The Atlantic.

Luders, E., Toga, A. W., & Thompson, P. M. (2014). Why size matters: Differences in brain volume account for apparent sex differences in callosal anatomy. NeuroImage, 84, 820-824.

Luhaorg, H., & Church, A. H. (1998). Gender, criteria, measurement, and behavioral job performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(3), 229-251.

McKinsey & Company. (2020). Diversity wins: How inclusion matters. McKinsey.

New Research: Women More Effective Than Men In All Leadership Measures. (n.d.).

Nielsen, S., & Huse, M. (2010). The contribution of women on boards of directors: Going beyond the surface. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 18(2), 136-148.

Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (2012). Emotion regulation and psychopathology: The role of gender. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 8, 161-187.

Post, C., & Byron, K. (2015). Women on boards and firm financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 58(5), 1546-1571.

Rosener, J. B. (1990). Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review, 68(6), 119-125.

Sarwar, A., et al. (2023). [Values-driven leadership in women].

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Currency.

Southwick, S. M., & Charney, D. S. (2012). Resilience: The science of mastering life's greatest challenges. Cambridge University Press.

Werner, E. E., & Smith, R. S. (2001). Journeys from childhood to midlife: Risk, resilience, and recovery. Cornell University Press.