How Patriarchal Values Diminish the People you Lead
Do our systems really produce the good we hope for?
Sometimes I think much progress has been made regarding the equality of men and women in the dynamic social spheres we daily inhabit. Then other days, I see and experience the systems that fail to create the changes I hope for. One of these systems, being the patriarchal values that are upheld and permeate many of our workplaces, churches and relationships without much conscious awareness.
Beth Allison Barr, author of The Making of Biblical Womanhood: How the Subjugation of Women Became Gospel Truth, summarizes the historical construct of patriarchy saying, “It suggests that, wherever you are in time, women’s ability to make choices about their lives is always limited by the men around them, and that they always have fewer options than men do.” You may recognize some of these patterns in the systems you are part of, alternatively, these patterns may be less apparent. Where I once thought that these patriarchal values were becoming more and more rare, I’m starting to see the subtle patterns and sometimes glaring examples that prove this is not the case.
At minimum, I believe patriarchal values support a male dominating, top-down leadership style that diminishes the people in the organization, leading to poor organizational health and outputs. At its worse, these values can perpetuate abuse and damaging practices.
To be clear, some of the best leaders I know are male leaders and when I refer to the patriarchy, I am in no way expressing that men should not be leading. Rather, I hope we can reflect on the type of leaders that a patriarchal model produces and, together, explore how we could rethink this model for the sake of our organizations, the cultures we foster, the future leaders we produce and the change we hope to enact. Yes, it is no small feat. We need the strengths of both men, and women to make these changes effective.
What is our measure of organizational success?
If the goal is to foster a culture that leads to the success of individuals and organizations, then we should be clear of our definition of success. I will refer to Liz Wiseman’s work in Multiplers as a framework that leads to successful organizations. She expresses the following characteristics of successful organizations:
Attracts talent and optimizes strengths, valuing the humanity of the people they lead
Presents challenges that demand the best in people, and provides the supports needed to accomplish these challenges
Debate, pushback, and feedback is welcomed and encouraged to cultivate the best ideas and model humility
Empowers people with ownership and accountability of their work
If we are going to cultivate this kind of culture in organizations, we must first recognize that we are not starting on neutral ground. Before we can build, some things might need to be named, dismantled and reconfigured. If we think of the leadership sphere as a game of monopoly, patriarchal values have created disproportionate advantages to some at the expense of others. Men seem to have more turns, they start with a larger amount of cash to play with, and they have a rule book that others don’t have access to.
Here are some of the patriarchal patterns that I have come across in various environments:
A male dominated leadership space: Male leadership generates more male leadership. This impacts mentoring relationships, who is considered for roles, and who we “can see” in that role in the future. When something has only been modelled in one way (male leadership) we find it hard to picture what it would look like for a woman to lead in that same role, therefore, limiting the opportunities for women.
Top down decision making: This form of leadership assumes that the top leader has the answers and that others in the space don’t have something to contribute. There are a number of problems with this assumption:
Limited buy-in: If one person is providing all the “answers” it doesn’t create buy-in to sustain the change or implement the idea. People are much more motivated to follow through on ideas that they made contributions to.
Fails to cultivate the best ideas: The ideas from top down leaders often don’t address the nuance of the problems, as they may not have experienced the problems they are seeking to solve. Therefore, people are left carrying out decisions they know will not work which leads to weariness and apathy. If people were empowered to generate solutions and collaborate to solve the problems they experience, it would lead to better ideas, stronger buy-in, and greater success.
People shrink back: This model trains people to “show up less.” They have learned that their voice doesn’t hold weight, so they bring less of themselves to their work. The quality of their work starts to decline, or if they can recognize that they are an under utilized asset, they will go to other organizations that will value them and the organization will suffer in retaining top quality talent.
So how do we work against these patriarchal/top down values and multiply the strengths and talents of the leaders in our care?
Here are a few thoughts I’ll offer:
Listen. Seek to understand, be curious and give people space to share. When you listen longer than most people do, you’ll tap into creativity that most people won’t ever access.
Practice humility. Assume there is something to be learned from every space and from every person in your midst. If you find yourself dissatisfied with the answers or discussion you are part of, perhaps your questions need to be more open or intentional. Great questions get great answers, fine questions get fine answers, and no questions get no answers.
Develop “think tanks.” Define the “problems” you are trying to solve and then generate ideas collectively.
Empower. Work hard to identify the strengths of your people and allow them to lead and operate from these strengths. If your team comes up with similar ideas that you had, let them take the credit! It should be more important to you that your team feels empowered and that the solutions are being worked through (rather than you getting credit).
Embrace Failure. Create space for failure when/if ideas don’t work and create space for learning from the mistakes in order to generate better solutions. See failure as inevitable side effect from fostering risk-taking and creativity and see the opportunity in debriefing these mistakes.
How do we see this change come about?
I believe it’s a team effort. If you are a male leader holding authority over your environment, it is a responsibility of yours to influence this change, but to do so through these renewed values. Ask the people you lead how they are impacted by the culture of the organization, humbly listen, and generate possible solutions together. Going back to the monopoly imagery, you may need to give your people the monopoly money (resources) to be able to make decisions over their game play, and think through ways you can give everyone a turn (equal opportunity, space to offer insights, autonomy over their environment). If no decisions are made to impact the environment, leaders are effectively making the decision to maintain the status quo.
Wiseman argues in Mulipliers that your best resource is your people. In an ever changing societal landscape, organizations no longer need experts in one field to lead. Instead, organizational leaders need to leverage the expansive expertise of the people around them.
Convinced that something needs to change? Here’s a word of nuance and caution as leaders work towards creating and sustaining change:
If people don’t respond immediately, it’s a reflection on the conditions that have been created. Creating an environment where people contribute and bring their best ideas will take time to generate. If you are a leader wanting to make changes to your leadership so that you are leveraging the strengths of your team better, a commitment to the change and to the process is integral. If you lead one meeting differently where more space is created and people do not share, you might be tempted to revert back but remember that people have been conditioned to not to show up in those spaces because they have learned that their voices will not be heard. It will require retraining, and a commitment to this change, to cultivate the voice of your people and for them to trust that you will actually take their insights seriously. This will be a process of building mutual trust. This will take time, but the rewards will be worth it.
And now a word of solidarity for those feeling less than.
I have been in positions where I lead and have influence, and also where I follow and take direction. I am bringing forward these thoughts as someone who has been disappointed. I write these words as a plea for change. I want to bring my full self to the spaces that I influence. I want to be challenged, I want expectations placed on me, I want to be in environments that demand my best. I believe I have so much to give, but so much of that is not being used. If you also find yourself in this place of disappointment, as best you can, keep trying to show up in the ways you want to be led. Bring your ideas, voice your opinions, give evidence to defend your insights, take up space. Then pay attention to how your environment responds. If your efforts are repeatedly brushed aside, dismissed, or rejected, and you feel like you are limited in your environment, then that might not be the right environment for you. Every circumstance requires consideration and context, so please discern wisely, but I simply offer that not every environment will welcome the change you wish to bring. I believe you deserve to be fully seen and that you have much to offer.
As always, here are some curious questions for self-reflection:
What culture do I hope to create in my organization or the places I lead?
What are my hopes for the people I lead? How can I develop, inspire, and get the best out of my team?
How could I create spaces to hear feedback from my team? How can I redesign environments to elicit this feedback?
How might I be sustaining environments that limit the capacity of my team?
How could meetings be better facilitated to create space for sharing and listening well?
How will I know I am building mutual trust with my team?