The Challenge of Claiming Leadership for Younger Female Managers: Exploring Differences Between Employees’ Behaviors and Perceptions

This paper is an assessment of the international career transitions made by senior female managers in Western Europe. The perspective explored is that of currently employed senior female managers in a wide range of companies, who have made at least one international career move. The article is based on data collected from interviews with fifty senior female international managers. The voices of the female managers illustrate difficulties they encounter in a 'man's world', and confirm that there is still much improvement to be made in order to accommodate and entice more women to senior management assignments. The study, for the first time, assesses an exclusively senior sample of female international managers in Western Europe. Previous studies have established that, throughout Europe, women's promotion into senior domestic management positions has been very slow, despite legislative changes, including the European Union's social protocol, to enforce issues related to equal opportunity such as equal pay and measures against sex discrimination (Davidson and Cooper, 1993). This article examines a number of explanations from the relevant literature and analyses the empirical data collected from the fifty interviewees in order to develop an understanding of senior female international career progressions in Europe. From the data, a model of the typical senior female international path was developed (Linehan, 2000). This research is particularly relevant, as existing European studies have not specifically addressed issues pertaining to senior female international managers.

This study aims to examine the influence of supportive leadership and family social support for female managers on organizational effectiveness and test the mediating effect of positive spillover between work and family (PSWF). This study utilized data of 974 married female managers from the 6th Korean Female Manager Panel (KWMP) survey to analyze the relationship between the latent variables. Hypotheses of this study were tested using Structural Equation Model Analysis (SEM). This study found that supportive leadership and PSWF have a positive influence on female managers' organizational effectiveness. However, family support had no significant effect on the organizational effectiveness of female managers. The analysis showed that supportive leadership and family social support positively influenced female manager's PSWF. Also, PSWF mediated the relationship between family social support and organizational effectiveness as well as between supportive leadership and organizational effectiveness. This study provides a better understanding of PSWF as a mediator between family social support and organizational effectiveness. Contrary to previous studies that focused on the negative effects of work-family conflicts, this study highlighted the role of PSWF, justifying the need for governmental or organizational programs to increase PSWF.

From the days in the mid-nineteenth century when the intrepid Margaret LaForge worked as the first lady boss of Macy's Department Store, women have been present in the work force as business managers, but never in significant numbers.1 In recent years, however, a convergence of legal, educational, demographic, and social developments have begun to move women into the mainstream of corporate management. This review essay analyzes the present state of research primarily from the United States on women as managers in business, commerce, and industry. As with many subjects dealing with the study of women, research on this one both benefits and suffers from falling between the territorial definitions of the disciplines. The subject is divided among a range of fields and subspecialties: industrial psychology, business administration, human resource development, industrial education, sociology, communications, management, and organizational psychology. Recently, there has been a rapid increase in research, more integrative work, and the emergence of a visible, major body of literature.2

In recent years there has been an increase in the number of women pursuing managerial careers. Previous studies have established that, throughout Europe, women’s advancement to senior domestic management positions has been very slow, despite legislative changes, including the European Union’s social protocol, to enforce issues related to equal opportunity such as equal pay and sex discrimination. The number of women managers pursuing international management careers, however, remains considerably lower than the number in domestic management. Previous research has established that only 3 percent of women are international managers. The data presented in this paper assert that female managers who are not part of an organisational support network experience even further career disadvantages. Based on an extensive empirical research study conducted with senior female international managers, the paper highlights the role which organisational networks have on the career development of female managers.

PurposeThis research aims to investigate the differences in evaluations of job performance between male and female managers by those managers’ immediate bosses and peers.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on gender structure theory, along with ideas about status characteristics, the authors use hierarchical regression to test the hypotheses that male and female bosses and peers deferentially evaluate the male and female manager’s global job performance. The authors hypothesize significant two-way interactions (gender of the manager by gender of evaluator) in predicting a manager’s job performance.FindingsThe results suggest that while male peers rate female managers’ job performance significantly lower than that of male managers, female peers do not discriminate between genders in their performance evaluations. Also, managers’ bosses were found not to discriminate between genders of their subordinates.Research limitations/implicationsThe limitations of this study have to do primarily with the data. While the data are rich on some dimensions, they are weak on others, especially with regard to the detail about the jobs the respondents did, detailed level of familiarity with the evaluated managers, as well as racial background. The data also do not provide information on the different facets of job performance, the evaluation of which could potentially be impacted by managerial gender; this study is focused exclusively on global job performance.Practical implicationsThe authors discuss various theoretical explanations of this pattern of results, as well as its possible influence on female managers’ careers. Although the effect size of the negative bias that male peers exhibit toward female managers is relatively small, it may be argued that lower performance assessments can accumulate over years in multiple job evaluations, negatively affecting the career of female leaders.Originality/valueThe evaluations supplied by different organizational members gain importance with the increased use of 360-degree feedback instruments not just for developmental but also for the job performance appraisal purposes. While the job evaluations of managers’ bosses have been investigated in the past with regard to the possible gender bias, this study provides the first known to the authors’, evidence. Also, this study points to a direct bias in performance assessments, rather than a potentially more subtle, non-performance-based bias that affects the disparities in wages and promotions of female managers. Thus, this study helps to fill a significant gap in the literature on organizations and it may have practical implications for the advancement of female managers. In addition to this contribution, this study also provides data that may be useful in resolving the ongoing debate whether female bosses act more as cogs in the machine or as change agents in organizations.

A study is reported examining how motivation to detect salary discrimination influences its detection depending on the difficulty of the detection task. Subjects were presented with information about the qualifications and salaries of female and male managers in 10 departments of a hypothetical company. This information was created so that female managers were undercompensated relative to their qualifications. The main dependent variable was subjects' ratings of gender discrimination. Independent variables were motivation and task difficulty. Based on Hull's drive theory an interaction effect was predicted and found: when the judgement task was easy, more gender discrimination was detected when motivation to detect discrimination was high rather than low, whereas when the judgement task was difficult, more gender discrimination was detected when motivation to detect discrimination was low rather than high. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Prompted by the findings of gender differences in leadership outcomes, in this study we set out to explore gender differences in managers’ leadership style and behavior (transformational leadership and expressed intellectual humility) as rated by their subordinates, as well as in work attitudes (perceived organizational support and work engagement) of their subordinates. Our results indicated that female managers are perceived by their subordinates as being significantly more transformational and intellectually humble than male managers. However, there were no differences in work attitudes between subordinates of female and male managers. Still, the mediation analysis showed that both perceived transformational leadership and intellectual humility of managers mediated the relationship between gender and subordinates’ work attitudes. We argue that transformational leadership style and intellectual humility might be the basis of women’s, but not men’s, managerial efficacy and call for additional research of gender differences in leadership styles, behaviors and effectiveness.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine gender‐related management stereotypes, perceived gender bias and evaluations of actual managers, and to directly compare stereotypes and ratings of actual managers.Design/methodology/approachQuestionnaires were distributed to employees in the bank and insurance sector, and 240 participants rated their actual managers and stereotypes of male and female managers.FindingsMen evaluated the female manager stereotype more positively on communal attributes, and the male manager stereotype more positively on agentic attributes. Women evaluated the female manager stereotype more positively on both communal and agentic attributes, but perceived a higher degree of gender bias in favor of male managers than men did. Actual male and female managers were rated similarly. Still, ratings of actual male managers corresponded more with stereotypes of male than female managers, and ratings of actual female managers corresponded more with stereotypes of female than male managers.Research limitations/implicationsFuture research needs to determine the direction of association between stereotypes and evaluations of actual managers, and the relative importance of agentic over communal attributes.Practical implicationsWhile women appeared biased in favor of their own gender, men may underestimate the difficulties that female managers encounter. Managers and human resource practitioners should notice these different views, and recognize that gender equality is not achieved in Sweden.Originality/valueThe present study contributes with data from an egalitarian society with a positive view of female managers, and a direct comparison of stereotypes and workplace evaluations.

Although societal and economic forces have dramatically altered the fabric of the workplace, gender inequities continue to exist in organizations. These inequities include wage disparities, glass ceilings, and other differences that impact the productivity, advancement, well-being, and contributions of men and women in the business world. Although such inequities are well documented, there are continuing gaps in our understanding of these phenomena. This symposium presents four methodologically diverse papers with a common focus on investigating the nature of gender bias in organizations. These papers rely on analyses of archival data (Compustat), inductive analyses (50 career stories), and laboratory work and simulation, with the shared focus on how to address important gaps in our comprehension of why gender biases exist and how to address them at both the individual and organizational levels. The symposium has three primary objectives. First, the symposium advances theoretical insights into the nature of gender bias. It shines the spotlight on how even small gender biases can result in increased segregation of promotion ladders and how the presence of uncertainty in the upper echelons of a firm can exacerbate such bias. Second, it presents key findings on how women can prevail despite subtle gender bias and how such bias might be overcome by decision makers. In particular, it discusses how women can climb the corporate ladder by emulating female business leaders who successfully made it to the top by establishing the legitimacy of their ascent. Third, it points at a structured way out of the gender bias labyrinth by designing a nudge for promotion committees. Specifically, it suggests that such committees should be encouraged to engage in joint versus individual evaluation of male and female applicants to provide a level playing field for both sexes. Together, the four papers that constitute this symposium not only present state-of-the-science research findings and discuss the practical implications of the research, but also highlight avenues for future work in the domain of glass ceilings and related gender bias issues. The themes of the symposium will be drawn together by the discussant, Jeanine Prime, Vice President of Catalyst, a leading nonprofit organization on the topic of gender issues. A particular feature of this symposium is that it brings together a diverse collection of participants with different backgrounds (economists, OB scholars, mathematicians), experience in academia and practice, and cultures that hail from different parts of the world (England, USA, India, and Malaysia). From bias to exclusion: A multilevel emergent theory of gender segregation in organizations Presenter: Richard F Martell; Montana State U. Presenter: Cynthia G. Emrich; Catalyst Presenter: James Robison-Cox; Montana State U. Claiming authority: How women explain their ascent to top business leadership positions Presenter: Hannah Riley Bowles; Harvard U.

PurposeThis paper aims at providing a profile of female managers in Egypt, determining their positions in hotel departments, and investigating the challenges preventing them from reaching the top management positions.Design/methodology/approachA sample of female managers in five star hotels was randomly selected, followed by an in‐depth interview conducted with 56 female managers. This sample represented 37.6 percent of the total population.FindingsThe results of the study depicted that the majority of female managers were not in situations that would lead them to the positions of general managers. The study detected several factors preventing female managers from reaching the glass ceiling. The stepwise multiple regression showed that 35.5 percent of the variance in the existence of challenges could be explained by four factors; gender discrimination, relationships at work, mentor support and lack of network access.Research limitations/implicationsThis study might be considered as a first step in understanding the situation of females in the hospitality industry in the Middle East region. Future studies concerned with different female issues in the industry should be diagnosed.Originality/valueIt is hoped that the results of the study would help alleviate the challenges that female managers face by increasing awareness, and illustrating the predominance of several factors prohibiting females’ advancement within the hospitality industry. It is prospected that the study findings will not only be of academic concern, but will also be beneficial for industry leaders and practitioners in practical application.

<p>Gender discrimination and sexual harassment contradict with the rights of women protected by law and practices at private sector organizations in Sri Lanka that may limit the career advancement of female employees. Several empirical researches on gender discrimination confirmed the impact of gender discriminations and sexual harassments on work motivation and productivity. However, this debilitating effect on the motivation and productivity of the female managers and professionals in Sri Lanka has not seen any empirical conclusion. The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between workplace gender discrimination and sexual harassment with employees works motivation and productivity. The study conducted by selecting 66 female employees (44 female managers/ professionals, 22 HR managers) as a sample from 22 medium and large scale organizations covering the Sri Lankan private sector. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses conduct on collected data through a self-administered questionnaire. The results confirmed the incidents of gender discrimination and sexual harassment are present in recruitment and promotions activities in the selected organizations. However, the results did not support the relationships between gender discrimination and the loss of motivation and productivity at work.  </p>

PurposeTo assess the relationship between leadership style, intuition, and emotional intelligence (EI) measured by a general and a workplace specific measure of EI in female managers.Design/methodology/approachThe study consisted of 176 female managers from several industries across Australia who completed a questionnaire battery consisting of the multifactor leadership questionnaire (MLQ), the cognitive style index (CSI), the trait meta‐mood scale (TMMS), and the workplace Swinburne University Emotional Intelligence Test (workplace SUEIT).FindingsThe results indicated that female managers displaying transformational leadership behaviours were more likely to display higher levels of EI and intuition than female managers displaying less transformational leadership behaviours. The workplace measure of EI was found to be the better predictor of transformational leadership behaviours than the general measure of EI, which was attributed to the workplace specific nature of the workplace SUEIT.Research limitations/implicationsThe implications of this research suggested the greater utility of workplace specific EI measures when concurrently assessing workplace outcomes. Research into leadership, EI and intuition may increase our understanding of effective leadership and could lead to the development of better tools for the selection, training and development of leaders.Originality/valueThis paper extends upon prior research that has identified a relationship between transformational leadership and EI, and also explores their relationship to the construct of intuition in female managers. It also addresses the important issue of the utility of two measures of EI in light of the workplace nature of the research.

ABSTRACTWomen make up the majority of doctoral degree earners yet remain underrepresented in tenure-track positions within the academy. Gender disparities result in part from the accumulation of subtle, typically unintentional biases that pervade workplace structures, practices, and patterns of interactions that inadvertently favor men. However, the subtle nature of gender bias makes it difficult to detect and thus diminishes the likelihood of action to address it. We experimentally evaluated the effectiveness of a brief intervention, the Workshop Activity for Gender Equity Simulation in the Academy (WAGES-Academic), which was designed to increase recognition of subtle gender bias in the academic workplace. Participants (N = 177) completed either the WAGES intervention or one of two control conditions and later evaluated promotion and tenure materials of a woman faculty member who received either a blatant sexist, subtle sexist, or nonsexist review. Consistent with hypotheses, WAGES participants (vs. controls) detected more subtle gender bias (ps < .02) and were subsequently more likely to report concerns about bias (ps < .04). Results suggest that low-cost interventions that educate individuals about subtle bias in a nonthreatening way may increase detection and reporting of gender bias in higher education institutions.

On December 21, 2021, the Turkish Archaeologists’ Association (Arkeologlar Derneği), the largest NGO for archaeology in Turkey and currently representing more than 200 members, shared a stock image of a female archaeologist. Wearing a pith helmet and a white shirt and sitting by a table with an old-fashioned camera, a laptop, and a notebook, she was doing desk work sitting under an umbrella in what seemed to be an archaeological site under a blazing sun. On this visual, and as a caption below, Arkeologlar Derneği added the following text: “Turkey’s female archaeologists continue to contribute to our profession without stopping. Godspeed . . .” (original text in Turkish, my translation). The colonial associations of the clothing of the woman, her doing desk work rather than actively engaging with the site, and the caption suggesting that archaeology by nature is a male profession in which women “participate” attracted sudden disagreement and outrage. The NGO initially defended itself by saying the photo was a mere representation and the protestors were being cynical. They closed the post to comments, and they disabled their social media accounts from being mentioned by other users. The public outcry from mainly female archaeologists did not cease, and on December 23, 2021, Arkeologlar Derneği removed the post with a public apology citing how sad they were about the negative feedback they received on a post they shared with the best of intentions.This brief two-day synopsis from Turkey is a fitting start as it highlights three important points that I wish to analyze further in my response1 to Erny and Godsey’s article, which puts forth a series of critical problems and questions on gender and archaeological fieldwork in the Mediterranean. As with the article by Michael Loy that sparked this exchange in the first place, Erny and Godsey’s examples also come mainly from Greece. In my response, my first aim will be to provide a view from Turkey to demonstrate that the issues the authors bring up are by no means endemic to the western side of the Aegean. Second, I will seek to complicate the issues around directing a field project and demonstrate why limiting our inquiries to project directors without considering the processes by which they become permit holders in the first place is constricting our view. Third, I will discuss what I call the “field-fetish,” a privileging of active fieldwork as the major mode of engaging with the archaeological record, thereby degrading the much more time consuming and expertise-requiring aftermath of artifact analysis to a secondary position. My point here aligns with Erny and Godsey’s critique of an emphasis on artifact collection at the expense of data interpretation.The gender imbalance in survey directorship in Greece demonstrated by Erny and Godsey prompted me to scrutinize the data from Turkey. Turkey’s Ministry of Culture and Tourism’s General Directorate of Cultural Assets and Museums (Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü) oversees all of the permits assigned to archaeological fieldwork, including excavation (subdivided into “foreign” and “Turkish” categories), survey (likewise “foreign” and “Turkish”), rescue excavations and surveys undertaken in various capacities (by museums, by local or international academic personnel before dam or highway construction), and underwater research. Annual lists for each category containing every single permit issued since 2006 can be accessed publicly (T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı 2022). Excluding the rescue missions, which tend to be driven by urgent needs and be requested by the state from museums or scholars (and not the other way around), and underwater research, as it is still a nascent subfield in Turkey, I chronicled the gender of the permit holders2 for the excavation and survey permits issued in 2006 and in 2019 to be able to chart change.3 Because of the high number of permits issued annually and my time limitations, I could not chart every year in between, but the results still reveal interesting patterns.I would like to highlight four points with respect to an analysis of permits issued in 2006 and 2019 (Fig. 1). The first is the crushing dominance of male directors across the board. The highest female representation was achieved in survey permits in 2019, but even this 32.4% is less than half of the 67.6% of the permits issued to male directors in the same year. An unfortunate caveat of the data here is my inability to see the application pools, and to comment on the acceptance rates of projects proposed by female and male directors. Second is the overall similarity of these results to what Erny and Godsey display for Greece, suggesting that we might be looking at shared practices across the Aegean (and possibly around the Mediterranean). Third, as Erny and Godsey also indicated, excavation and survey need to be evaluated together, as they demonstrate similar patterns in gender inequality. In 2019, a 67.6% male directorship in survey was paralleled by a 68.6% male direction in excavations. Apart from this similarity in representation, survey and excavation are still directly related in Turkey, with many surveys undertaken with the specific aim of deciding on a site to excavate, or excavations engendering site-centered regional survey to gather data on the larger context. In the latter, the hierarchies and labor division of the parent excavation tend to be replicated in the survey.Finally, the numbers and ratios from 2006 and 2019 permits might suggest an optimistic and upward trend in increasing female directorship in excavations, and especially surveys, which increased from 22.7% female directorship in 2006 to 32.4% in 2019. This corresponds to 15 more female (29 in 2006, 44 in 2019) and 7 fewer male directors (99 in 2006, 92 in 2019). Whether this is related to increased applications from female scholars or to increased acceptance rates of the projects they proposed remains unclear. While I applaud any such increase, a more detailed analysis of the Turkish case below demonstrates the need to incorporate intersectionality into any discussion of gender and archaeological fieldwork.Fieldwork in both Greece and Turkey operates under the laws of nation states, and archaeology and the permission to undertake it have always been intertwined with claims and politics of nationality (see Atakuman 2008 and Hamilakis 2007). In this context, looking at gender irrelevant of nationality is impossible, as national politics can override or support gender discrimination. When we break down the dataset presented above according to gender and nationality, we see an overall decline in foreign permits (Fig. 2). Regardless of the decline in numbers, the dramatic male dominance of foreign surveys in Turkey stayed consistent (84.4% male directorship in 2006 and 83.3% in 2019). By 2019, however, this translates to only one female foreign director (Dr. Anja Slawisch directing the Panormos Survey in the Milesian peninsula). When we look at excavations, we see a reversed pattern, with the 79.5% male directorship in foreign excavations declining to an admittedly still crushing 68.8% in 2019. Overall, foreign female archaeologists seem to be the most underrepresented group among fieldwork directors.Erny and Godsey’s questions of what we exclude from the narrative when we focus on project directors at the expense of the team merit further discussion here. While they approached the topic from the perspective of who is allowed to publish specific sections of a field project, the decision-making processes of who gets to be the permit applicant goes unquestioned. Here I’ll tackle this issue from the politics of choosing “the director,” who is to be the primary name on the survey permit.In Turkey, survey permits can only be issued in the name of one individual, and “co-director” or “assistant director” are not accepted as valid legal designations, while some projects use them on their websites.4 Here, then, collaborative projects need to make a choice as to who will apply to be the primary permit holder. Within a climate of increasing requirements from foreign projects, holding Turkish citizenship and being employed in a Turkish institution might be a more important factor for deciding the permit applicant in a collaboration than gender. This is not to say that survey directorship is not laden with gender inequality. On the contrary, thinking about the steps needed to acquire and maintain archaeological survey permits introduces many other stages in which gender inequality, (self-)discrimination and the internalized sexism of female archaeologists play out.If we now focus on Turkish survey projects and the visible rise in female directorship between 2006 and 2019 (25.0% in 2006; 33.1% in 2019), this seemingly positive development also obscures many layers of internalized and external discrimination against female archaeologists. The law governing archaeological fieldwork in Turkey (T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Teftiş Kurulu Başkanlığı 2020) explicitly puts forward three prerequisites for applying for new excavation permits: holding an undergraduate degree in archaeology (Item 4b), holding the academic title of associate professor (if foreign) or doctor with scientific publications (if Turkish) with at least five years of active excavation experience (Item 4ç), and having completed a survey in the proposed area (4d).5 For directing surveys, the applicant needs to hold a PhD (area unspecified, Item 5a), have at least four years of field experience (Item 5c), and has to demonstrate a close association between the proposed research topic and her/his area of expertise (Item 5i and 5j). Here, the legal framework clearly prioritizes excavation as a more important mode of fieldwork and situates survey as a milestone leading to it. Thus, while the rise in female directorship in survey is encouraging, this needs to be evaluated together with a decrease in female leadership in excavations. Potential reasons for this include the “leaky pipeline” up the academic ladder also cited by Erny and Godsey, the exclusion of interdisciplinary scholars from directing excavations, and the long-term commitments required for excavations annually and over multiple years, which pose strict challenges for maintaining a work-life balance.Exploring gender and archaeology from an intersectional perspective, then, reveals that running the numbers through gender only is not enough. We need to consider nationality, educational background, and aspects of personal life such as primary care responsibilities that tend to fall more dominantly on female professionals. Such a detailed study, of course, necessitates a research methodology involving focused interviews and questionnaires undertaken with field archaeologists of multiple backgrounds and falls beyond the limits of my response here.The final point I’d like to highlight in my review is what I call the “field-fetish,” an obsession with field survey and land coverage as the most valuable element in archaeological studies. Perhaps even more so than other archaeological fieldwork, pedestrian survey has its roots in military excursions.6 Many of us walk transects, almost in (an admittedly loose) military formation, in unison. We climb to the higher points of the landscape to have better visibility of the land around us. We use satellite images, even those from decommissioned and declassified spy missions. Having adopted such tools of canvassing, conquest, surveillance, and colonialism, archaeology has unfortunately also inherited a toxic masculinity that manifests itself with large numbers of sexual assault cases directed almost exclusively at female team members (see, most recently, Çilingiroğlu 2022 demonstrating that 42% of archaeology students in Turkey report having endured sexual harassment and assault in the field while the actual numbers must be unfortunately even higher), assumed gender roles reflecting on labor division (with especially junior female colleagues asked to do more house-keeping), and an overall masculine tone in survey publications. Telling indices of this last point include implicit suggestions of physical prowess through emphasis on the size of the entire survey area and sometimes the part covered on foot, as well as the areas of the ancient settlements discovered during fieldwork.7This field-fetish comes at the expense of degrading material analysis and publication to a secondary position. As demonstrated by Erny and Godsey, these are spheres of knowledge production that female professionals (unsurprisingly) take greater part in. However, the dominant practices of field survey in the eastern Mediterranean also operate at the expense of fostering equality and inclusion during fieldwork itself—of taking time in the field to train our teams, of stopping for as many moments as necessary to explain to a student why we are doing what we are doing, and of pausing to listen to their questions and ideas.So, where do we go from here? We, directors of field projects, owe it to future generations of archaeologists to foster an inclusive and diverse atmosphere in the field and to not tolerate gender discrimination, sexual harassment, or mobbing of any kind. We need to lead with compassion and provide a safe environment in which our team members can express themselves, can be themselves. Otherwise, we fail our crews when we use them as almost automated data collectors without ideas of their own. We fail our younger colleagues when we rigidly insist on our own research questions. We fail ourselves when we enable or ignore sexual harassment and mobbing under our watch. And we fail past societies when the dominant archaeological narratives produced primarily by senior, cisgender, white male archaeologists betray the diversity and richness of ancient communities.

The purpose of this study was to determine the most important leadership and managerial behaviors for project managers as perceived by female project managers and to ascertain the frequency with which these behaviors are practiced by female project managers. A survey instrument of leadership behaviors was submitted to female project managers, representing a variety of industries, team types, and sizes. The respondents were asked to rate each behavior as to its importance for an effective project manager to exhibit and to indicate the frequency of use by female project managers. Even though much of the literature on effective leaders indicates the importance of transformational behaviors, the results of this study show that the respondents do not attach as much importance to transformational leadership behaviors as they do managerial skills and transactional leadership behaviors. They also use transactional leadership behaviors and managerial skills more frequently than transformational leadership behaviors.