 |
 |
 |
|
  Volume 13 Numbers 2 and 3, 2003 LEARNING LEADERSHIP: COMMUNICATION, RESISTANCE, ANDAFRICAN AMERICAN WOMEN’S EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENTPatricia S. ParkerThe University of North Carolina at Chapel HillAbstract: This article examines leadership development as revealed in the life histories of 15 African American women who have attained upper level executive positions within large, hierarchical, predominantly White organizations in the United States (dominant culture organizations). Executive leadership development is viewed as a socialization process beginning in early childhood that encompasses both leadership development and organizational socialization. A standpoint feminist framework is used to call attention to the ways marginalized groups, such as African American girls and women, resist the discourses and institutional arrangements that reproduce “outsider status” in the socialization process. Four themes emerged as salient in the women’s narratives about their development as organizational leaders, (a) childhood: education, race, and identity matter, (b) high school: fighting discourses of outsider status, (c) college/early career: resisting controlling identities of strangeness and uppity-ness, and (d) career ascent: strategies for remaining self-defined. The occupational profile
of African American1 women
has changed dramatically over the past six decades. In 1949, 42 percent of African American
female employees worked in domestic service.
In 1990, 19 percent were in managerial and professional occupations, and
39 percent were in technical or administrative positions (O’Hare,
Pollard, Mann, & Kent, 1992). This upward trend continues, with some
reports that African American women are outpacing their male counterparts in
school and work settings (Cose, 2003).2 As more African American women move into leadership
roles in U.S. corporations and public institutions, it is important to document
their leadership development experiences and broaden our understanding of how
girls and women develop as organizational leaders. In this article, executive leadership development is
viewed as an ongoing socialization process beginning in early childhood that
encompasses both leadership development and organizational socialization.
Leadership development is characterized as a life span process with early, as
well as later, life events, affecting the development of leadership potential (Avolio & Gibbons, 1988).
Similarly, organizational socialization, broadly conceptualized, is the process
through which persons develop their work career from childhood through
employment and advancement in ones chosen vocation (Jablin,
1987, 2001). Communication is
central to both leadership development and organizational socialization
processes, as messages received in familial and other social and cultural
contexts influence a person’s vocational choice and career advancement (Jablin, 2001),
as well as their development of leadership potential (Gibbons, 1986; Kotter, 1982). The mainstream literature
on organizational socialization in general and leadership development in
particular, is based on the problematic assumption that Anglo3- and
male-defined theories and practices can be generalized to other cultural
groups. Bullis and Stout (2000)
call attention to the universalizing assumption of mainstream organizational
socialization theories that “specific, linear, male patterns pertain generally
to the population” (p. 63). This universalization is
problematic because it erases the experiences of people whose lives do not
follow these patterns, and limits the opportunity for alternative patterns to
be considered (Bullis & Stout,
2000). Along similar lines, in the leadership development literature, two
of the most influential studies on executive leadership development are based
on the lives of White middle class men and assumed generalizable
to all populations (Gibbons, 1986; Kotter, 1982). Because organizational leadership
learning and practice is essentially culture-based (Biggart & Hammilton, 1994),
it seems especially shortsighted to assume that White and male-defined
perspectives can be applied to the lives of women of color. This article examines leadership development and
organizational socialization as revealed in the life histories of 15 African
American women who have attained upper level executive positions within large,
hierarchical, predominantly White organizations in the United States (dominant
culture organizations). The study documents messages and discourses that framed
the women’s leadership development experiences, from their earliest childhood memories
through their early career experiences, revealing their communication
strategies for resisting, transcending and transforming perceived exclusionary
practices in vocational and organizational socialization. I begin
with a discussion of feminist standpoint theory as a framework for analysis,
followed by a critical review of the literatures on leadership development and
organizational socialization and delineation of the research questions that
guided the study. Then I present the study of African American women
executives’ leadership development. Feminist Standpoint TheoryA useful framework for
analyzing African American women’s leadership development is feminist
standpoint theory (Collins, 1990, 1998;
Harding, 1991; Harstock, 1983, 1990; O’Brien Hallstein, 1997, 2000; Smith, 1987; Wood, 1992, 1998). Feminist standpoint
theorists argue that women as a group occupy a distinct position and potential
standpoint in culture because, “under the sexual division of labor ensconced in
patriarchy, women have been systematically exploited, oppressed, excluded,
devalued, and dominated” (O’Brien Hallstein, 2000, p. 5). Emphasizing a collective “women’s
experience,” however, is problematic, because it produces a tension between
highlighting women’s experiences as a critique of hegemonic discourses on the
one hand, and avoiding essentializing women’s
experiences on the other (Alvesson
& Billing, 1997; Bell, Orbe,
Drummond, & Camara, 2000). African American,
Hispanic, Native American, and Asian American women have criticized feminist
scholarship for being overly concerned with White, heterosexual, middle-class women’s
issues (Andolsen, 1986; Collins, 1990; hooks, 1981; Moraga & Anzaldua, 1983). In
early works by standpoint theorists, heterosexual White women’s values and
experiences are often put forth as representative of all women’s values
and experiences, rendering invisible the experiences of lesbians or women of
color (Harstock, 1983). Standpoint theorists responding
to critiques of essentialism (i.e. Allen, 1996; Buzzanell, 1994) assert that
rather than essentializing the category woman,
feminist standpoint theory encourages us to explore the experiences of many
types of women and to incorporate notions of differences into standpoint theory
(O’Brien Hallstein, 2000).
From this perspective, a standpoint is more than simply occupying a particular
societal position. Standpoints are achieved through “active, political
resistance to work against the material embodiment of the perspective and
experience of the dominant group. It is the act of having to push against the experience-made-reality
of the hegemonic group that makes it a political standpoint and potentially
liberating” (Welton, 1997, p.11).
While earlier work using standpoint theory emphasized women’s common
experiences, current work, including the present analysis, recognizes that women’s
common experience is different among groups to the extent that material
experience differs. That is, racial, class, and sexual differences create the
potential for different standpoints among women (Harding,
1991). As a method of analysis,
standpoint theory provides an epistemology that focuses on the production of
knowledge that leads to emancipation from oppressive social conditions (Harding, 1987). A fundamental tenet of standpoint epistemology
is that the standpoints of women and others marginalized by intersecting
systems of oppression (i.e., race, class, gender, age, and sexual orientation),
emerge from positions from which they are able to see, not only their own
positions, but the dominant system as a whole. This view from the margins is
often referred to as the “outsider within” perspective (Collins, 1990, 1998). Outsiders within
the dominant culture are assumed to be able to provide a more complete and less
distorting social perspective (Harding, 1987) than is
possible from the point of view of the “insiders” or more privileged group
members (usually White, middle-class men). Two important goals of
standpoint epistemology are to center the experiences of women and others
marginalized by dominant culture, and to create positive social change (Dougherty & Krone, 2000).
Standpoint research explores the practices of people who, in their everyday
interactions, “take up resistance and struggle…producing knowledge that extends
and expands their and our grasp of how things are put together and hence their
and our ability to organize and act effectively” (Smith, 1987,
p. 96). In the present analysis, I use
a Black feminist standpoint framework to generate knowledge about
organizational leadership socialization. Collins (1990)
argues that a Black feminist standpoint emerges from African American women’s
location as outsiders-within systems of domination, and directs attention to
African American women as self-defined, self-reliant individuals confronting
race, gender, and class oppression. From the vantage point of the outsider
within, African American women have created an independent, viable, yet
subjugated knowledge concerning our own subordination and strategies for
empowerment (Collins, 1990). From that vantage point,
Black women also have created knowledge about leadership that historically has
been ignored or devalued (Parker, 2001). The present
study places Black women at the center of analysis to reveal knowledge about
leadership development and organizational socialization from their standpoints. Review of Literature and Research QuestionsTwo
related streams of literature provide the background for this study. The first is leadership development,
including research on gender and leadership. The second is organizational
socialization theory and research. Communication Contexts for Leadership DevelopmentResearchers in executive leadership development
attempt to explain the familial, cultural, and social influences on leadership capacity
(Bass, 1990; Burns, 1978; Gibbons, 1986; Kotter,
1982). During a leader's early life—childhood, adolescence, college, and
early career—messages they receive in contexts such as family, school,
part-time jobs, and community activities are influential antecedents to
leadership development. Research on the communicative contexts for leadership
development has focused almost exclusively on the lives of White, middle-class
men and, more recently, on the experiences of White middle-class women. Two
widely cited studies of executive leadership development, based on the lives of
White men, are exemplary. Gibbons (1986) developed a
model of life span events that contribute to leadership, based on the
retrospective life histories of sixteen top-level corporate executives. Among
the most significant antecedents to leadership was the predisposition
established as a result of parental encouragement and the expectation for the
leader to set high standards for achievement. Similarly, Kotter's
(1982) study of fifteen general managers in U.S.
organizations revealed that their leadership development was marked by an ethic
of accomplishment stimulated by messages of encouragement from parents and
significant adults. Although their studies were not framed as standpoint
analyses, it can be argued that Gibbons (1986) and Kotter (1982) provide knowledge about
leadership development from the perspectives of White men. Yet these studies
are often represented as general knowledge about leadership development to be
applied across social groups (Conger, Kanungo,
& Associates, 1988; Yukl,
2002). From a feminist standpoint perspective, it seems likely that
messages which influence leadership development within the context of assumed
White male privilege would be constructed and interpreted differently within
the communicative context of women’s lives. Feminist scholars have challenged the gender bias in
the leadership literature. However, this
research is based almost exclusively on the lives of White, middle-class women,
and assumed generalized to all women (Aries, 1987; Grossman & Chester, 1990; Harrigan, 1977; Henning & Jardim, 1977; Helgesen,
1990; Rosener, 1990). The
underlying premise of most gender and leadership research is that, within
familial and other social and cultural contexts, women and men are socialized
as children to engage in distinctive styles of communication that achieve
different purposes, rules, and understandings of how to interpret talk (Tannen, 1990). These gendered
patterns of communication are theorized to produce two competing models of
leadership. One model is based on the notion of “masculine” instrumentality,
and the other is based on the notion of “feminine” collaboration. Feminists
argue that women’s “distinctly female” style of leadership is superior to “masculine”
leadership, but is stifled by male-dominated structuring processes (Grossman & Chester, 1990; Helgesen, 1990).
Communicative contexts
for leadership socialization among African American girls and women. Both
the “feminine” and “masculine” models of leadership socialization erase the
experiences of African American women because they emerge from the standpoint
of White middle-class privilege, and because they are constructed within communicative
contexts assumed to be race-neutral (Parker, 2001).
For African American girls and women, the interlocking systems of race, gender,
and class oppression frame the communicative contexts for leadership development.
Rather than generalizing an Anglo-defined “distinctly feminine” style of leadership
to the experiences of African American women, research is needed that takes
into account the raced, gendered, and classed contexts in which African American
girls and women construct a “feminine” identity and leadership style (Parker
and Ogilvie, 1996; Parker,
2001). Some research suggests that
within school contexts, African American girls’ identity formation takes the
form of resistance to the taken-for-granted definitions of femaleness
(White, middle-class womanhood) (Duke, 2002; Fordham, 1993; Gilligan, Taylor, Tolman, Sullivan, Pleasants & Dorney,
1992; Ladner, 1971).
However, research is needed to explore the connections between African American
girls’ resistance and their potential for leadership development. In the family context, important
components of the leadership development process, such as parental messages of
encouragement and achievement during early childhood and adolescence, may be
enacted to prepare African American children for interaction within dominant
culture institutions and systems. Orbe (1998a) uses the term “co-cultural communication” to
conceptualize this type of interaction. Co-cultural theory describes how those
without societal power communicate with persons who are privileged within
dominant structures (usually European American, heterosexual, able-bodied men).
Orbe (1998b) argues that
co-cultural group members (i.e., people of color, women, gay/lesbian/bisexuals,
persons with different abilities) enact one or more of
nine communication orientations in their interactions within dominant culture
organizations. The nine communication orientations are on a continuum of
nonassertive, assertive, and aggressive communication approaches, associated
with three possible acculturation outcomes—assimilation, accommodation, and
separation (Orbe, 1998a).
Briefly, assimilation involves attempts to eliminate cultural differences,
including the loss of any distinctive characteristics, to fit in with the
dominant culture. Accommodation, referred to in this article by the more common
term “pluralism,” involves attempts to change the organizational culture so
that many cultural experiences are reflected in it. Separation involves
rejecting the notion of forming a common bond with dominant group members or
members of other groups.4 The nine communication
orientations range from nonassertive assimilation to aggressive separation and
encompass a number of corresponding co-cultural communication practices.5 Orbe (1998a) argues that a
person’s selection for interacting with the dominant culture is influenced by
ongoing interactions, beginning in childhood. This argument is supported by
empirical research on childhood development which shows that African American
children receive messages that help them to do well simultaneously in both
Black and non-Black cultures (McAdoo, 2002). Research
specific to the experiences of African American girls shows that Black girls
develop cultural conventions of Black womanhood that may help an adolescent
girl to stay in relationship with herself and her community and be a source of
personal self-esteem and pride (Gilligan, et al., 1992).
Past research has not adequately explored the extent
to which messages about interacting within dominant culture systems influence
African American girls’ and women’s leadership development. Jones’ (1992)
retrospective interview study of 17 African American women college presidents
provides some preliminary insights. She examined cognitive attributes,
leadership-developing activities (such as those associated with school and
work) and parallel life experiences that function as leadership antecedents.
Jones’ (1992) study revealed “quite powerful” messages
derived from the presidents’ interactions with parents and significant adult
others as children (p. 114). Such
messages were “Always push the system,” “Be unwilling to settle for less,” “Set
the standard, don't follow the crowd,” and “Destiny is choice, not chance” (p.
114). The findings of Jones' (1992) study provide some
evidence that messages about interacting within dominant culture systems
influence African American women’s leadership.
However, more research is needed to provide specific, qualitative
details about the sources and content of such messages. In summary, past research on
the communicative contexts for leadership development has focused almost
exclusively on the lives of White, middle-class men and women, and is
inadequate for understanding the experiences of African American women’s
leadership development. Research is needed to document the communicative
contexts of African American girls’ and women’s leadership development. The
following research question guided the study: RQ1 What are
common themes in the messages African American women executives identify from
their childhood, adolescence, high school and professional experiences as
influencing their development as executive leaders? Organizational SocializationSocialization is traditionally
conceptualized in the organizational and managerial communication literature as
a phase process in which organizational “outsiders” move through various stages
to become organizational “insiders.”
However, for African American women and other marginalized groups in
dominant culture organizations, insider status is never achieved (Collins, 1998; Orbe,
1998b). Accordingly, scholars following critical and feminist perspectives
have re-conceptualized socialization as a process in which there is a dual
emphasis on producing insiders and reproducing and sustaining outsider
status among marginalized groups (Allen, 1996, 2000; Bullis
& Stout, 2000; Clair, 1996; Smith
& Turner, 1995). Bullis and Stout (re)define socialization as “a set of
communicative processes that produce and reproduce relationships through which
domination, subordination, and marginalization occur (Bullis & Stout, 2000, p. 59). They argue, following
Englebrecht (1994) that
rather than the clearly defined steps of stage models, socialization for women
may be seen more as a game of “blindman’s bluff,” in
which the steps of socialization are not visible, and clues are not derived
from other players. Instead, women move
through a continuous process of being marked as other and excluded. Allen (1996)
addresses this key issue in her review of organizational socialization theory
from her standpoint as a Black woman.
She points out that theories of vocational choice/socialization and
organizational choice/entry do not account for the social and political
contexts that influence important issues such as organizational or work
information sources, candidates’ expectations, and employment interviewing as a
recruiting and selection device. For
Black women and other people of color, these issues are influenced by the
interactive systems of racism, sexism, and classism
that produce societal stereotypes about occupation, and constrain the context
for advancement (Allen, 1996). Collins (1998)
argues that for African American girls and women within dominant culture
institutions, this process of marking and exclusion may take the form of
surveillance strategies embedded in organizational discourses. Collins
theorizes that such strategies operate to fix meanings of “appropriate” and
“professional” identity and behavior and to “keep race at bay” in school or
work settings (Collins, 1998, p. 39). These meanings are fixed through power-based
communicative practices in which aspects of Black girls’ and Black women’s
behavior and identity are monitored, evaluated, and otherwise made the subject
of seemingly random scrutiny and speculation. From their critical review of
the traditional socialization literature, Bullis and
Stout (2001) call for research that would provide a
better understanding of oppressive relationships as well as resistance and
change. They suggest that socialization research should examine the standpoints
women develop from their position as perpetual outsiders, placing at the center
of analysis, reports of resistance strategies among persons marginalized by
exclusionary discourses. The present study answers Bullis
and Stout’s research call as it relates to African American women executives’
leadership socialization and development by examining the following research
question: RQ2 What
communicative strategies of resistance and transformation did the participants
use as they advanced through their careers? MethodThe research reported here is part of a larger study
that examined African American women executives’ leadership socialization,
communication strategies for managing dominant culture constraints and
opportunities, and leadership communication (Parker, 1997).
The data analysis for the socialization portion of that study is reported in
this article. The research followed a field study design (multiple case method) and used qualitative methods. ParticipantsThe participants in the study
were 15 African American women in upper level executive positions within large,
hierarchical, predominantly White organizations in the United States (dominant
culture organizations). The executives were chosen based on the following
criteria: (a) they were employed at a
dominant culture organization at the time of the study; (b) they were at the
level of director or above; (c) they had line responsibility; and (d) they had
supervisory responsibilities. These criteria are consistent with those used by
other researchers interested in top management leadership by women (e.g. Mainiero, 1994; Rosener, 1990). A modified snowball technique
was used to identify study participants. Using sources in the popular press (Black
In addition to regional
diversity, the executives varied in terms of socioeconomic backgrounds, age,
and tenure, as well as organizational type and industry. In terms of
socioeconomic background, the executives’ parents’ occupations ranged from a
single-parent domestic worker to a husband and wife team of physicians. The executives ranged in age from their late
thirties to early sixties. Most of the women were in their forties at the time
of the interview, with an average age of 47. Nine of the women had been with
their organization for 16 years or more, including five that had an
organizational tenure of 20 years or more. Thirteen of the executives had been
in their current positions for less than three years. Seven executives were
employed at public organizations, and eight worked at private corporations. The
industries represented in the sample were insurance, communications, education,
and state and federal government. Eight
of the women were employed in public institutions and seven were employed in
private corporations. Data Collection The data for this portion of
the study were collected through face-to-face interviews with each executive.
Interviews followed a semi-structured interview protocol, based on topics
related to the research questions (see Appendix A). Most
interviews lasted about one hour; they ranged from 45 minutes to two and
one-half hours. The interviews were tape recorded and transcribed. Data AnalysisThe interview transcripts were coded using constant
comparative analysis in which data were assigned to an emergent open coding
scheme (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). As an internal validity check, I recorded
propositions and hypotheses that emerged as I made comparisons among and
between the cases. Consistent with the constructivist approach to grounded theory
analysis (see Charmaz, 2000),
during the coding process, I used memos to record my thinking about connections
and relationships among the data and emerging themes. The use of memos during
the analytic phase allowed me to remain close to the respondents’ experiences,
to remain focused on their meanings, and to develop categories
consistent with studied life. ResultsThis study investigated two
questions relative to African American women executives’ leadership
development. The first question asked,
What are common themes in the messages African American women executives
identify from their childhood, adolescence, high school and professional
experiences as influencing their development as executive leaders? The second question asked, What
communicative strategies of resistance and transformation did the participants
use as they advanced through their careers? The participants’ narratives
revealed insights about specific messages and discourses that framed their
socialization experiences through childhood, high school, and early career (see
Table 1), as well as the resistance strategies they used
as they advanced through their careers (see Table 2).
Four themes emerged as salient in the women’s narratives, (a) childhood:
education, race, and identity matter, (b) high school: fighting discourses of
outsider status, (c) college/early career: resisting controlling identities of
strangeness and uppity-ness, and (d) career ascent: strategies for remaining
self-defined. Childhood: Education, Race and Identity MatterThe executives reported that their parents and other
influential adults were the primary sources of influence during their formative
years. Eleven of the participants were
raised by both biological parents, two were raised by one biological parent and
a stepparent, one was raised by her mother, and one was raised by her maternal
grandmother. Regardless of the family
composition, all the executives reported that their interaction within their
primary family unit and with other influential adults (such as grandparents,
aunts, uncles, and teachers) helped shape their present leadership behavior and
communication. The predominant themes associated with this familial influence
are the resonant messages they received from their parents and other
influential adults. The predominant
message themes were (a) educational achievement, (b) understanding race
relations, and (c) developing a strong self-identity.
Educational
achievement. Many of the executives emphasized that
education was central to their parents’ aspirations for their children. One executive explained: I knew they [my parents]
wanted us to do well, you know, to...add positively to society. I don’t know that they had anything in mind
for anyone, except their goal was for us to complete our education... Similarly, one executive
compared the messages she received from her parents emphasizing education to
the messages received by her White female counterparts: I was at a retreat this past
weekend...a Black/White kind of thing, and people were talking about the role
of women, and referred to girls growing up and
education not being important and what was important was that you married
somebody who takes care of you. Four
girls in my family. . . I don’t ever once remember having a conversation about
whom you’re going to marry. Never. Or about getting married.
INTERVIEWER: So, at this retreat, that was sort of the
White perspective? EXECUTIVE: Yeah. You got it.
Absolutely.
The White perspective. Just never…If the
conversation was going to come up, surely it would come up in a family of four
girls. But that’s just not ever
anything that was discussed, “Who are you going to marry?” Or
making sure that you were going to marry the right person. INTERVIEWER: What do you think were your parents’
expectations for you? EXECUTIVE: That we’d go off
to school and go off to college and do something meaningful as a result of
having been educated well. Being well educated. In addition to the emphasis on
contributing to society in meaningful ways, other executives were taught during
their childhood that education is especially important for them, as African
Americans, to be able to transcend the economic limitations of their parents
and other significant adults. Among the
executives whose parents or guardians worked as laborers, the clear message was
“get an education so that you do not have to work like this.” One executive recalled: Well, my grandmother was a
hard worker. And probably the thing that
I learned was that I didn’t like manual work and I didn’t want to do that
because, you know, she came from a rural background and she had a garden and
she had some land where she raised cotton and she raised pigs and hogs and
chickens and stuff. And I hated doing
that. I know she was a very big believer
in education. . . going to school... [her belief was that] you needed to [do] better than she [has
done], and she really made sacrifices to that effect. Teachers also were very
instrumental in emphasizing the “get an education” message, as one executive
recalled: I think my teachers were
always out there, you know, telling us that if we ever wanted to get off the
farm and stop picking cotton or chopping cotton that we were going to have to
get an education. So that was drilled
into us over and over again—the importance of education. Race relations. The second predominant sub-theme related to childhood
socialization describes an approach to dealing with race relations in the
dominant culture. Among these messages,
two distinct approaches emerged, avoidance and confrontation, which correspond
to Orbe’s (1998a)
acculturation outcomes, assimilation, accommodation (pluralism), and
separation. An avoidance approach was evident in messages that emphasized
separation and assimilation as preferred outcomes for interacting with the
dominant culture. A confrontation approach was evident in messages that
emphasized the pluralism approach. The avoidance approach to race relations,
emphasizing separation, is exemplified in the following passage: I went to a segregated
elementary school, I went to a segregated high school, and when I decided to go
to college, I looked at predominantly Black universities because, quite
frankly, as I looked at the newscasts of federal marshals having to escort
people to the University of Alabama--and I was sixteen years old when I
graduated from high school-- that was not something my parents, my mom, my
stepfather, nor my grandparents wanted me to go through. As evidenced in the above
passage, the key message that informs the avoidance approach to race relations,
emphasizing a separatist acculturation outcome, is avoiding cultural
confrontation with the dominant culture through an emphasis on one’s own
culture. Other executives described
experiences that reveal the assimilation outcome of acculturation, which also
is facilitated by an avoidance approach to race relations. However, avoidance
of cultural confrontation is facilitated through a de-emphasis or denial of
cultural conflict. Two executives recounted how their early experiences led
them to believe that racism was something that happened in the South, and not
in the part of the country in which they lived. I grew up in the North, many
people I know now grew up in the South, so I did not experience first-hand the
racial prejudices that some of my peers did in Atlanta and other Southern
areas. I have one very, very vague
recollection of one trip to New Orleans by train, and seeing a sign, which
said, “Colored” and “White.” But short
of that, and I don’t know if we were just sheltered from it or, I suspect, it
just wasn’t as acceptable in the North to have, in the years that I was growing
up, to have those outward segregation-type signs. Other executives’ descriptions
of messages about race fit the more classic assimilationist
acculturation outcome, which prescribes that hard work and persistence allow
one to transcend racial barriers: We grew up in a neighborhood
where there were Whites and Blacks in the neighborhood. We didn’t feel that we were less of a citizen
than anybody else.…My mother would tell us things that happened when she was
growing up, but not to the point where we felt that, just be careful that
you're going to be discriminated against and be aware of certain things. Their
message was just work hard, do the best you can, give more than what's expected
and get a good education. Collectively, these accounts
convey an approach to race relations that denies or downplays the significance
of race in one's personal experiences. On the other hand, some of the
participants emphasized a confronting approach to race relations, which
corresponds to a preferred acculturation outcome of pluralism. One version of
the pluralist acculturation outcome is a focus on economic pluralism: On the other side of my
family [was] my grandmother, again a very strong influence...[S]he was an
entrepreneur. She was a woman who owned
hotels and restaurants. She came out of
southwest Virginia on a mule with a cardboard suitcase because she had worked
in the kitchen of White folks and decided that she didn't want that to happen
for her children. So I knew her to be an
uneducated woman compared to, say, my paternal grandparents, both of whom were
college graduates who placed great store both in education, but more
importantly, earning your own way. It
is through her and my father that I learned the phrase, “It is important to
have your own ‘Black money’,” before it was ever popular to use the phrase.…I
have always been taught and knew until I guess I was in undergraduate school
that it was very important to be within a system, to move the system to ends
that served people who are in the Black community. In addition to having one's own
“Black money” and moving systems to ends that serve the Black community,
another variation of the pluralist approach is confronting or changing dominant
culture systems to become more inclusive of non-dominant cultures. Two
executives described messages that fit this approach to achieving cultural
pluralism. One executive describes vividly how her parents taught her to
confront systems of oppression, even if it meant standing alone. When I started second grade
I was six years old, because I had started school a year early, when I was
five, at the community school, which was Black.
And I remember crying and being very upset and telling my mother I don't
want to be going to a White school. My
mother said, “Don't worry; it's not White it's red
brick.” And so that kind of helped shape my ideas. You know, in terms of it's
okay to stand alone. It's okay to do the
difficult thing because, you know, this is life. So that's the leadership thing for me. Developing
a strong self-identity. The
final predominant theme from the executives’ childhood narratives relates to
messages from influential adults that helped them develop a strong sense of
self. The executives cited parents, teachers and other members of the
community, who provided discipline, encouragement, and a view of the world that
was beyond their present circumstances.
Three sub-themes define this theme: self-confidence, responsibility,
and integrity. Self-confidence is an
important theme in the messages the women received during their childhood. The following passage exemplifies this theme: I don’t believe my mother
really understood all of the confidence that she was building in me, as I kind
of had my own personality, but then she built me up a lot just in terms of
her... the way she would speak with [my siblings and me]….We’d say, “Oh, we
can’t do this.” And my mother had this
saying and she would always say it, “Don’t tell me you can’t do it. They killed old can’t, beat the devil out of
couldn’t, whipped old wouldn’t till he would.
Don’t tell me you can’t do it.”
And you know, back when you’re young, you’re like, “What in the world is
she talking about?” But I can tell you,
that has really become something that I share with a
lot of people in my work, and I do some community work, and I share that. Another executive describes how
she learned independence and self-sufficiency from her mother: My mother always had a lot
going on. She always thought she should
have her own business, and she never had the opportunity, really, to get that
going. She communicated to me a lot the
need to be independent, the need to have self-sufficiency and be able to think
and move on your own. Similarly, another executive
says she received messages of self-definition from her mother: I know I got from my mother
the ability to say whatever it is I want to say and be comfortable with who and
what I am—not allowing people to violate you in any way, form, or fashion,
based upon their standards. And, basically to just...be a strong person. My mother is probably one of the strongest
women I have ever known. Many of the women shared how
Black female role models whom they knew or had only heard about influenced
their sense of self: I was surrounded by some
very strong Black women…There were many women who were, what I would consider
to be very independent even though…they weren't standing on their feet
economically, but their mindset was very independent…They didn't ask permission
to do things….In fact, my father's mother had a very strong community
imperative. She actually single-handedly
forced the integration of some services for the Columbus Public Schools in the
early part of the century. You know, I'm
talking 1910, 1912. So, she was very active in the community and very well
perceived and I just assumed she had that ability; nobody gave it to her. Collectively, these accounts
reveal how the women, at very early stages of their life, were encouraged and
taught to develop self-confidence, to be independent and resilient, and to
remain true to oneself, no matter what the circumstance. Messages
emphasizing being responsible or taking charge also were salient. For example
one executive recalled: I was the
oldest. And so I thought there were a
far more expectations of me…. I was kind of responsible for my sisters and
brothers, and [my parents] felt that I was responsible….So I've had an
opportunity to really grow up from the very beginning, being the leader, taking
charge, organizing to get whatever work done that we had to get done. Another
executive recalled being encouraged by her father to take part in
extracurricular school activities as a means of learning responsibility. Other executives were taught to be socially
responsible, especially in terms of having a sense of community and fulfilling
one's civic duty: So, the family tradition was
of leadership and also a great sense of responsibility for the broader
community. I have recollections of [my maternal]
grandmother whose back porch was always filled with clothing, clean, folded
clothing in sizes that she routinely gave to others. And she was always
identifying people, some of whom were in her employ, worked in her restaurant,
who needed help. She brought thirteen of
her relatives out of that almost plantation‑like environment in southwest
Virginia, to see them educated as well.
And so, that's sort of the tradition of the family. The
executives gave descriptions of messages that focused on developing a sense of
personal integrity. The messages
emphasized altruism (especially as related to the Black community and service
to others less fortunate), religion, having a strong work ethic, “the golden
rule,” and not forgetting your roots.
The following passage offers one succinct example: I learned
fairness from my mother. I learned how
to treat people like I wanted to be treated.
She told all of us that you're as good as the best person, and as bad as
the worst; and you speak to everyone….Just because you're up today, you don't
know where you're going to be tomorrow.
So don't forget where you came from. Among these
executives, integrity and “not forgetting where you come from” applies to those
who have somewhat humble economic beginnings as well as to those who came from
more economically prosperous backgrounds.
One executive describes how her traditional, upper-middle class southern
family instilled in her the traditions of religion and service to the
community: There is
so much unspoken. I knew that we were
special. I knew that we were different. I knew that we had advantage, but with
awareness of whatever this specialness came the
obligation to do for, and to give to, and support others, especially in
education. High School: Fighting Discourses of Outsider StatusThe women’s high school years
were rife with both opportunities and challenges. Most of the women reported
having aspirations of going on to college, and many of them were already very
clear about pursuing specific careers in professions, such as medicine and law. Although they continued to find support from
their parents and other influential adults, it is during this time period when
the women began to encounter discourses that would mark them as outsiders—as
not being college material, or not being considered for careers in medicine or
other White male-dominated professions.
These encounters usually took the form of “negative achievement
messages” from Anglo-American teachers and counselors. One executive gave this
account: Let me tell you about one
critical [incident that] I know. . . strongly directed
me. [When I was in the] ninth grade, I
had a…White male counselor…. I was…selecting my next classes, and he [told me]
that I would be better off…taking home economics and sewing.
. . something that I could use later.
And, at the time, what I was looking for was college prep classes….
number one, because mom was pointing me that way, and number
two, because I, you know, I wanted to go…. I, of course, was highly upset over
it and insulted . . . .I told him that I didn't t want
to do that. And so I went home and told
my mom, which was the end of that… I got to take the college prep classes like
I wanted to. But, his focus was that I
could do something more domestic to help myself later in the future, because I
probably would not go to college….And that still rang in the back of my head,
you know, for years and years and years….that influenced my direction and gave
me more focus to say, “ I m going to do this just
because you don't want me to do it.” Other executives gave similar accounts of negative
achievement messages during high school: In high school, the first
thing the counselor asked me was which technical school was I going to,
although my grades were decent. I had
been the student body president, and I'd been all of the other things. She felt that I should have gone to some type
of technical school. And I said, “No
way! I'm going to college.” In another account: In high school I was marked
down because I had a teacher tell me that I should learn how not to have...that
I should get used to having B's because as a Black person that would happen to
me later. Even though I had an A in the
course, he says, well, I'm going to give you a “B” because, well, you know... These experiences represent
challenges to the strong sense of self that the women had begun to develop as
children through the positive influences of their mothers and other role
models. That the women resisted and
persisted in their career aspirations in spite of these challenges provides
evidence of their strong self-identity. Early Career: Resisting Controlling Identities of “Strangeness” and “Uppity-ness”During
their years in college, graduate school and the early part of their careers,
the women were confronted with experiences that tested the strong sense of self
identity that had been instilled in them by their parents and role models, and
that had already been challenged during their high school years. As in high
school, the women continued to receive both positive and negative achievement
messages in the years that followed. However, within the socio-cultural
contexts of college, graduate school, and public and private organizations,
issues of identity negotiation became even more salient. Among the 15 executives, nine gave accounts
of salient messages from college professors and managers that related directly
to achievement. Seven of those were
related to negative achievement. The
women found themselves having to prove that they “belong” in contexts where
their mere presence as Black women seemed “strange.” One executive gave the
following account: I had a math professor. He may have actually
been my advisor. You know, I probably
didn’t belong in the math department; there is probably no question about it. But the message that I received was one that
“You don’t belong here. And you can’t do
this.” And I guess the way I received it, and I can’t honestly say it was a
result of the way it was sent, because I don’t know. The way I received it was,
“You can’t do this you little Black kid.”
You know, “You don’t belong in this math department.” So my reaction, rather than evaluating
objectively and saying, you know, “Right!
I don’t belong in this department,” I just did it anyway like “You’re
not going to tell me I can’t do this.”
And I struggled through and did it.
There is no question in my mind; I didn’t need to be a math major. Just some people can do it really easily, and
people who are math majors are usually whizzes in that area. So I was probably that much more
disadvantaged in terms of how well I could do in the class and how well someone
else can do. INTERVIEWER: So did you change majors eventually? EXECUTIVE: No. What I did
is…on top of the math major…[I added] the requirements
for the political science major. So I
did both. For better or worse, I guess,
you know, I was going to make sure that nobody was going to tell me I couldn’t
do that. So I finished it. As demonstrated in the above
account, the women challenged discourses of “strangeness” through a
determination to achieve beyond the expectations of others. However this eagerness to achieve was
sometimes viewed as what can be termed “uppity-ness,” an evocative term that
conjures up images of the oppression of the “Jim Crow” south. One executive
recalled a manager who sought to stifle her achievement early in her
career: I remember this woman who
was a first-level manager. And she
stopped me one evening and she said, “I have noticed you always taking those
practices home.” And I said, “Yes.” And
she says, “Why are you doing that?” And I said, “Well, there are some areas I
just want to make sure that I’m really clear about. .
. you know, have sort of immediate recall about the process.” And she told me
she didn’t want me doing that. And I
said, “Why?” And she said because she
didn’t think that any…service assistant should be smarter than another
one. And you know, this is…the value of
not having any hang-ups about diversity or anything like that . . . I mean, I
just looked at her and laughed, and said, “Humph.” And I just walked off with
my practice under my arm. I mean things
like that just never fazed me. Another executive described how
one manager attempted to downplay her previous job experience: I can remember when I worked for
this...manager, the person who hired me on the job. And at the time, I felt I had come to the
company with some pre-knowledge that would help me do a better job, [even
though] the experience was not related to this business. One of the things the manager said to me that
I would always remember is that he said, “Your previous experience would not be
of any…benefit to you here.” Once I got on the floor and saw the work, I could
do three times as much work as someone else, because I had had training…in [my
previous job] to spot errors…. it was probably more of a challenge for me to
let him see that my years of experience somewhere else really was a great
benefit to him….This is 26 years later and I still remember that comment that
he made. In contrast to the accounts of negative achievement
messages, two executives reported positive messages that were particularly
salient during their early career development.
These women said they received encouragement from a White female
professor and an African American male professor, respectively. One executive recalled an influential
professor's message at the historically White women's college she had attended: When I was at [a
Northeastern women's college], the person who was most critical to my
considering going on to graduate school was a White female professor in the
business department who had gone to Harvard business school and was
instrumental in talking to me and a number of other Black women about going
on. So, I know that she was influential
with [several other African American women who are now quite successful] So, I mean, this
woman kind of opened up the world to a lot of people because one of the
problems is, when you are fairly young and you don’t have a whole lot of role
models, you don’t even . . . you are very narrow in your concept of what you
can do. So, until someone says, “Have
you ever thought about this?” It just
broadens your world considerably. And I
think, nowadays, people see people doing all kinds of things, but in those days
it was much more unusual. Besides, I
would never have thought about it. An executive
who attended a historically Black university in the South during the fifties
reported another example of a positive achievement message: I remember one day, I had really decided to quit
[college], and I was sitting out on the steps, and my biology professor [an
African American man] came and sat down beside me. He knew that I was talking about quitting and
going home. And he said, “ Well, you know you can quit and go back home. What are you going to do? You'll probably go
back home, go back to the cotton patch, have babies, and live the same way your
parents did. If you stay here, you might
be able to move ahead and…someday you’ll be able to pay it back.” And you know it was really at a very critical
time for me. I will never forget that. The executives emphasized that during their early
career development, they drew from the inner strength and knowledge they gained
from their parents and other significant adults in their lives. The messages and sources of influence served
as a powerful force that helped them meet successfully the challenges and
opportunities they encountered and that strengthened their capacities to lead
others as they advanced in their careers.
Career Ascent: Using Strategies for Remaining Self-Defined.As the executives recalled their career progress, they
revealed several critical incidents that show a distinct model of opportunities
that can lead to advancement within dominant culture organizations. The
trajectory revealed in these incidents can be described in three steps: (1)
attracting attention by being hardworking and doing good work; (2) gaining
organization-wide visibility through successfully working on “pariah projects”
(e.g. projects no one wants to take on) or projects that affect the company's
bottom line; and (3) getting the “stamp of approval” from a member of top
management (or at least getting his or her attention). Because each step generally causes
progression to the next, these steps form a trajectory that, in the case of the
women in this study, led into senior management. If this trajectory represents a road map to
career advancement, from the women’s point of view, remaining self-defined is
the fuel that keeps them moving ahead. The executives’ accounts of
their experiences as they advanced in their career within dominant culture
organizations revealed four strategies for remaining self defined: (a) know who you are, (b) be the best, (c) build a support system, and (d)
contribute to the organization. Each of
these categories contains specific communicative strategies for remaining
self-defined within dominant culture organizations (see Table 2).
Know who you are. The executives
talked about this strategy in terms of being self-confident about who they are and not changing that, no matter what the
situation. The underlying source of that self confidence is acknowledging their
"difference" vis
a' vis the dominant culture: First of all, I think you
have to always remember that you were Black, you are Black, and you're gonna always be Black.
And so, regardless of what anybody says to you about the playing field
being level, I don't buy it. It's not
going to ever be level as long as there are differences in people. I just don't
buy that. And so, why is that important?
It is because…you are always mindful of being true to what your sincere beliefs
are. You don't sway to fit the mold,
because it doesn't matter. You can sway
to fit the mold, but you still may be excluded from the mold. So, to me, the first ground rule is just remember who you are and don't, don't, don't
move. If you believe something, you
believe it, if you have a moral conviction then have it. Another key tactic is to use
“difference” to foster inter-group cooperation.
One executive stated that interacting with others who have had limited
contact with African Americans is an opportunity to use her
"difference" constructively: I am so clear about who I am
and whose I am. I have a real strong
belief in God….So when I come to the workplace, I don’t have to act, speak,
talk like anybody else. I can be myself,
and I’m proud of that. Everything that
I’ve accomplished has been purely because of who I really am….I’m proud to be a
Black woman. And I’m proud to travel in
these circles that, in a lot of cases, I know these people have never even been
close to somebody Black. You know, and
to be able to just be there and be so comfortable with them.
. . you know, and just love every minute of it, you know. I just do. Be the best. The executives
emphasized the importance of excelling at what one does for the business. The following is one example: I finished my Masters on
Thursday and went away to my first [organizationally sponsored] class on a
Sunday evening. It was a two-week
class—like the introductory stuff. I
came back and I had finished about the middle of the pack. I had just finished four years of graduate
school in the evenings and on weekends with a 4.0. And I was like, “Give me a break—entry-level
marketing training? Bunch of college
kids.” You know. And they were all hyped up about this thing. So when I got back, my manager said, “We’re
sort of disappointed in you.” I said,
“What do you mean disappointed?” “Well,
we thought you would finish at the top of the class.” I said, “Oh, is that
important?” I mean, this is like
training for job search, this is not . . .this isn’t
academic to me. I’ve finished a
Master’s. I said, “Got it!” So from then on I was at the top of the
class. I was number one in my large
systems, technical, I finished number one in sales. I said, “If that’s important, what are the
rules of the game?” So once we got that
straightened, it was “Oh,
OK. Now.” Another executive explained how
to strategically manage “being the best” while maintaining effective
intra-group relations. You know what my mission
is—I’ve got to be the best. And not to
the detriment of my partner, I mean, part of being the best in my mind, was
making sure that everybody around you had what they needed if you could give it
to them. Still other executives noted
the challenge of being the best and making sure key individuals know about
one's successes: In terms of how hard I work and
the ideas I've had that other people got rewarded for, [I've learned] that
women don't ring their bell as loudly or as much as I've seen men. And I think this feeling, well, if I do a
good job, somebody's going to recognize it and take care of me. Deal with racism and sexism. The executives’ narratives revealed that an
important lesson learned through their experiences within dominant culture
organizations is that racism and sexism only affects one personally if one
allows it. This approach to dealing with racism and sexism ranged from denial
of the insidious nature of racism and sexism, to redefining perceived racist
and sexist actions by a colleague as that colleague’s problem, not theirs. In
either case, the key strategic element is to use goal-oriented communication,
staying focused on positive interpersonal or personal outcomes. Two examples
demonstrate these strategic responses to racism and sexism: A newspaper interviewed me
about this glass ceiling thing. . .and I told them,
obviously, intellectually, there must be something there. All you’ve got to do is look around any
corporation and see who the senior leaders are, and there’s going to be far
fewer women than men. But for me
personally, I think it is there when I believe that it’s there. And I don’t believe that. So for me, it’s staying focused on the basic
things that human beings are really expected to do. And, you know, whether you
look in the Bible or wherever you get your inspiration from, there are some
basic behaviors that I think, if we want to do the right thing, we’ll all be
very honest, we will be dependable, we will care about people. We expect the
best from ourselves and others. Another tactic is to simply ignore any personal attacks
that might be construed as differential treatment, focusing instead on personal
outcomes: Well, you see, I was in
medical school [during a time prior to the integration of predominantly White
schools]. So I was really feeling very
grateful and good to be in medical school [at a predominantly White
school]. And I was feeling grateful and
good to be able to survive. INTERVIWER: You never got
the feeling you were being validated.
You know, getting the message, it's okay for
you to become a doctor? Or it's not
okay--you don't deserve to be here. Did
you ever get any of those messages? EXECUTIVE: No, but you know,
I probably didn't hear them. Or see
them. You know, to me it was survival. Build a support system. The executives noted the importance of building
a support system both inside and outside the organization. One tactic is to
build cross-race alliances. In the
following passage one executive discloses what she is teaching her adolescent
daughter about using this tactic while participating within dominant culture
environments: She has spent her entire
life being the only Black student, the only Black girl in her class from
pre-first to [when she attends college].
Well, except for two years. She’s
been in a totally White environment her entire life academically. And, part of what I didn’t do in law school,
I didn’t join study groups. . . well I wasn’t invited to join a study group. .
. but I also didn’t know to go and seek one out. I probably didn’t even know they
existed. Well, she knows they exist, she
knows that concept, and she’s in a study group with her classmates right now. Another tactic is to build intra-organizational
cross-race alliances and same-race alliances outside the organization: I wasn’t really isolated
because I had probably, in high school as well as college, learned how to just
deal with people and not to isolate. . . not to say that . . . well, this is a
Black or White person I can’t get along with. . . my roommates were White, if
you want to look at it from a racial point of view. And we were the best of friends as suite
mates, roommates, etc. And continued to be up until one of them died about four years ago.
But just kind of kept that relationship and contact with each
other when we were there and during the summertime, etc. So, [the predominantly White university]
wasn’t bad. I excelled there. Other executives emphasized
actively seeking mentors and using networking.
One executive recalled: I had [White male] mentors
who [held positions of power in the community], who were the best [at
networking]…I watched how they worked with other people. How they worked with
[nationally prominent politicians from the state] to get grants for the city. How they talked to people, and what they
used—the networking they used to get things done. And it works. Contribute to the Organization's Effectiveness. All 15 of the
executives talked about the importance of contributing to the overall
effectiveness of the organization.
Indeed, many of the executives see this as a key factor in their ascent
into senior management. One executive
reasoned that holding positions in areas that directly affect the company's
goals led to her relatively rapid rise through the company's ranks: I was nominated for an
officer’s position [by the CEO]. Most
Black females are not going to have that opportunity. [This company] I believe is a finance-driven
company, very much so . . .and I was in the finance
area. And I also started with the
company when the company was very small and had interaction then with the chief
financial officer. [T]here were very few
Black females, or Black anything here in any kind of professional position at
the time that I came, other than [an African American male] who is now senior
vice-president in personnel. So, I got
the long tenure…I was in an area of finance where there was a lot of
interaction with senior officers and the executive management…so I had the
opportunity for exposure and visibility.
And so, I think, as I said, right place, right time. Many of the executives
recommended that African American women managers within dominant culture
organizations should make sure that their contribution is made known to
others. They used phrases such as
“ringing your own bell,” tooting your own horn,” and “telling your own story,”
to signify that African American women often must take responsibility for
making sure their contributions to the organization's effectiveness are
recognized. In summary, the communication
themes above represent one current interpretation of leadership development and
organizational socialization grounded in the experiences of African American
women executives who attained leadership positions within dominant culture
organizations. Consistent with the goals of feminist standpoint theory, these themes
can be seen as movement toward valuing knowledge produced from African American
women’s standpoint. In the next section, I discuss insights gained from this
study and offer directions for future research, theory and practice. DiscussionThe purpose of this research
was to examine leadership development and organizational socialization as
revealed in the life histories of 15 African American women who have attained
upper level executive positions within large, hierarchical, predominantly White
organizations in the United States (dominant culture organizations). Past
research in these areas has focused almost exclusively on the lives of
middle-class White men and women and assumed generalized to all populations.
The present research employed feminist standpoint epistemology, placing Black
women at the center of analysis to reveal specific, qualitative details about
leadership development and organizational socialization from their standpoints.
Following is a discussion of insights gained from this study relative to the
ways African American women learn leadership and advance within dominant
culture organizations. Learning LeadershipThis research generated key
insights about the ways in which African American girls and women learn
leadership within the context of race, gender, and class oppression. One
insight gained from this study is that Anglo-defined leadership development
messages that emphasize strong identity and high achievement are interpreted as
survival in the context of African American women’s lives. Similar to
studies focusing on the lives of middle-class White men, the most influential
messages in this study related to encouragement from parents and other
significant adults to strive for achievement (Bass, 1990; Burns, 1978; Gibbons, 1986; Kotter, 1982). Also, similar to
studies based on White women’s leadership development, the participants of this
study were encouraged to develop a strong sense of self as women (see Helgesen, 1990). However,
messages of achievement and identity described by the women in this study were
framed as tools for surviving within the dominant culture. That is, what was
important was their achievement and identity as Black women. This survival
frame was evident for women regardless of the socioeconomic status of their
family of origin. This reinforces the
notion that within the interlocking systems of race, gender, and class oppression,
the influence of race and gender may sometimes overshadow class as a salient
factor (Essed, 1994; Slevin & Wingrove,
1998). A second insight gained from
this study relates to early communication influences on later leadership
behavior. Consistent with a life span explanation of leadership development (Avolio & Gibbons, 1988), the
results of this study demonstrate that communication during early childhood and
adolescence serves to contextualize present behavior. From the standpoints of
the women in this study, there were two important communicative influences on
their development as leaders,
(a) positive messages from influential adults during childhood
and adolescence; and (b) their own responses to negative achievement messages
from high school counselors and teachers. First, positive messages received
during their formative years related to identity development (self-confidence,
responsibility, and integrity), were especially influential in shaping the
women’s current leadership approach. Consistently, the women used phrases such
as “I have to be me” and “I know who I am” as key interpretations for their
current leadership behavior. Such
statements resonate with the messages they received during childhood and
adolescence that focused on developing self-confidence. These phrases also
resonate with the executives’ descriptions of what they learned about
responsibility and integrity—to take charge when necessary, and to be there
when others need you. Several women reported that an
important influence on their leadership development was their ability to resist
the negative achievement messages they encountered in their high school years
and early career development. The messages these executives received during
their formative years, focusing on achievement, identity, and managing race
relations, seemed to prepare them for the negative messages of achievement they
received in high school and college, and during the early years of their
careers. In each of the seven accounts
in which an executive was told by a college professor or manager that she could
not achieve some professional or career-related goal, her response was to prove
the person wrong by striving to achieve the goal. The executives attributed their resolve and
inner strength to the encouragement from their parents and other significant
adults. Their own testing of that resolve and inner strength, however, reinforced
their confidence as leaders. Organizational Socialization: Advancing within Dominant Culture InstitutionsThis research provides insights
about African American women’s organizational socialization. First, this study
reinforces the view that for African American women and other marginalized groups,
organizational socialization is a process in which persons resist
organizational attempts at reproducing and sustaining their status as outsiders
(Allen, 1996, 2000; Bullis & Stout, 2000; Clair, 1996; Smith & Turner, 1995).
Indeed, the notion of resistance is a constant underlying theme in their
communication environments during every stage of their development as
organizational leaders. In the early
stages they received messages from their parents and other significant adults
to remain self-defined, encouraging them to resist attempts by others to
control them. In later stages, as they continued in their vocational
socialization, the women themselves enacted resistance strategies to fight
discourses of outsider status and to remain self-defined in school and work
contexts. The emphasis on resistance revealed in the women’s
narratives is consistent with other Black feminist standpoint research, which
emphasizes a particular expression of resistance to power from African American
women’s location in systems of power relations (Collins,
1990; hooks, 1990; Hull, et al.,
1982; Lorde, 1984). For
example, hooks (1990) describes
strategies for Black women’s resistance which are evident in the present study:
(a) breaking silence against oppression, (b) developing reflexive speech
through dialogues among individual women, and (c) confronting or talking back
to elite discourses. A second insight about organizational
socialization gained from this study relates to co-cultural communication (Orbe, 1998a, 1998b).
Among the women in this study, there was a common emphasis on remaining
self-defined as they advanced within their organization. However, there was diversity in the women’s
approaches to interacting within dominant culture organizations as they were
striving to remain self-defined. This
diversity reflects the particular communication orientation that can be traced
to influential messages about race relations that the women received during
childhood. The women’s co-cultural orientation practices ranged from
nonassertive separation (e.g., avoiding) to aggressive accommodation and nonassertive
assimilation (confronting) (Orbe,
1998). The diversity in the women’s approaches to interacting within
dominant culture organizations underscores the importance of acknowledging
different standpoints among individual women (Allen, 2000). Directions for Future Research, Theory, and Practice As with any investigation, this one has some
limitations that should be addressed in future investigations. First, because
retrospective interviews were used, the results may suffer from self-report
biases such as social desirability and recall biases. The executives may have
been inclined to give socially desirable responses during the retrospective
accounts of their leadership socialization and current leadership ability. To
address this limitation in the present study, the executives were asked for
concrete examples to support their assertions, especially when the claims were
general in nature. Future research should employ longitudinal research designs,
beginning with interviews and observations of African American adolescent girls
and following them throughout their career (see Farmer &
Associates, 1997). Another limitation relates to
the generalizability of the data. This study focused
on a subset of a relatively small population of organizational leaders within
dominant culture organizations and, therefore, the results should not be
generalized to the entire population of such leaders. Rather these results
should be viewed similarly to Mintzberg’s (1973) study of five executive men and Helgesen’s
(1990) study of four executive women. In both these
studies, as in the present one, the intent was to broaden our understanding of
leadership by listening closely to the experiences of leaders in situ.
Future research should use larger sample sizes to explore the ideas generated
in this study. Despite
its limitations, the findings of this study have implications for future
research, theory, and practice in the areas of leadership development and
organizational socialization. First, research is needed to document the
communicative contexts of contemporary African American girls’ leadership
development and career socialization. The potential for success occurs within a
complex social, cultural, and political environment that, by many important
measures, is becoming increasingly difficult for African American girls to
navigate (Holcomb-McCoy & Moore-Thomas, 2001; Twine, 2000). African American adolescent girls, particularly
those living in impoverished neighborhoods with high crime rates, are at risk
for low academic achievement, teen pregnancy, drug abuse, and becoming victims
of violence (Arnold, 1994). Furthermore, girls across
socioeconomic statuses are contending with racialized
images in the press and popular media of African American women as welfare
queens and video divas, juxtaposed with inaccessible images of the
overachieving Black lady and the good White woman (Duke, 2002;
Fordham, 1993). Current research suggests that, unlike
the experiences of African American women who came of age in the 1950s, 60s,
and 70s, contemporary African American girls often do not have the social
support and opportunities to develop a strong identity and sense of agency
needed for professional success (Holcomb-McCoy &
Moore-Thomas, 2001). Based on the
findings of the present study, and given the contemporary context of cultural
and political change, future research is needed to investigate three areas
relative to African American girls’ leadership development. First, researchers
should explore the sources of salient messages, including co-cultural
communication practices that help to empower African American girls and foster
their leadership development. Second, research is needed to investigate the
nature and function of community networks available to provide positive support
for African American girls. Finally,
researchers should investigate African American girls’ self-defined strategies
for resistance. The findings of this study have implications for
research on organizational socialization practices. As noted, the findings indicate that
reproducing and sustaining “outsider status” among certain groups, including
African American women, is a function of organizational socialization
practices. However, these practices are often subtle, and embedded in everyday
interactions within dominant culture organizations (see Parker, 2002, in press).
Research is needed to make these practices visible, and to envision
socialization practices that empower all organizational members. One approach
is to research “best communication practices” as revealed in organizations that
recruit and maintain traditionally excluded groups. ConclusionThis research examined leadership development and organizational
socialization as revealed in the life histories of 15 African American women
who have attained upper level executive positions within dominant culture
U.S. organizations. A standpoint feminist framework was used to call attention
to the ways marginalized groups, such as African American girls and women,
resist the discourses and institutional arrangements that reproduce “outsider
status” in the socialization process. Hopefully this study will generate research
that further illuminates the resistance process and identifies ways to transform
oppressive organizational systems into generative systems that enable the
growth and development of future leaders. Notes1. The author wishes to thank the anonymous reviewers and the editor for their insightful comments on drafts of this manuscript. An earlier version of this article was presented at the 2001 meeting of the National Communication Association, Atlanta, GA. 2. I use the terms “African American” and “Black” interchangeably in this article. 3. Although African American women are ascending into the
professional-managerial class at a faster rate than Black men, the median
income for African American men remains higher than that of African American women
(Browne, 1999).
Indeed, as a group, African American women, along with Latinas and
Native American women, continue to be most at risk for poverty and low wages in
the U.S. labor market (Browne, 1999). Also, African
American women face more restricted opportunities for upward mobility than
their White female counterparts (Bell & Nkomo, 2001). 4. I use the terms “Anglo,” Anglo American,” and
“White” interchangeably in this article 5. Cox, (1993) identifies a fourth possible acculturation
outcome, deculturation, which occurs when an
individual severs ties with his or her original sociocultural
group but has not been successful in forming new ties with the dominant culture
or has been rejected by it (Cox, 1993, p. 167). 6. See Orbe (1998) for a complete
explication of the nine orientations and their associated communication practices. Appendix: Interview ProtocolLet's start
by discussing the life experiences that most influenced your leadership
development beginning with your early childhood. 1. First, tell me about your family. a) What was the size and composition of
your family? -Where
were you in the birth order? b) Tell me about your mother and father
(or other person (s) that reared you). -What were
their roles within your family? -What
were/are their occupations? -What
was/is their educational background? c) Are there any parental behaviors or
attitudes that you admired as a child and that you have come to reflect or
emulate as an adult? Please describe
them? d) What were some of the important
messages that you received from your parents that you feel helped to shape who
you are today? 2. What other adults, other
than your parents, influenced you during your childhood and early adolescence? a) behaviors or
attitudes that you have come to reflect or emulate? b) important
messages that you feel helped to shape who you are today? 3. Focusing on the high school and
college years, describe any critical incidents, significant
experiences, persons or events that influenced your leadership development. a) What did you learn about leadership
from these influences? b) When did you recognize yourself as a
leader? 4. Now, let's discuss your career
track a) What specific obstacles did you have to
overcome/deal with as you progressed through your career? b) What instances of discrimination
(differential treatment) have you encountered as you progressed in your career? 1) What happened? Where did it occur? Who was involved? 2) Why do you think this incident
occurred? 3) What was your response? 4) In retrospect, how would you have
handled the incident differently, if at all? c) What lessons did you learn as a result
of your experiences as you progressed through your career? 1) What would you do differently? 5. As you reflect
on your life experiences, what do you consider the most significant influences
on your development as a leader? ReferencesAllen, B. J. (1996). Feminist standpoint theory: A Black
woman’s (re)view of organizational socialization. Communication Studies, 47(Winter),
257-271. Allen, B. J. (2000). “Learning the
ropes”: A Black feminist standpoint analysis. In P. Buzzanell,
(Ed.), Rethinking organizational & managerial communication from feminist
perspectives, 177-208. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Alvesson,
M. & Billing, Y. D. (1997). Understanding gender and organizations. London: Sage. Andolsen, B. H.
(1986) Daughters of Jefferson, daughters of bootblacks: Racism and American feminism. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press. Aries, E. (1987). Gender and communication.
In P. Shaver & C. Hendrick
(Eds.), Sex and gender (pp. 149-176). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Arnold, R. (1994). Black women in prison: The price of
resistance. In, M. Baca Zinn &
B. T. Dill (Eds.), Women of color in Avolio,
B. J., & Gibbons, T. C. (1988). Developing transformational
leaders: A life span approach. In J. A. Conger, & N. Kanungo (Eds.). Charismatic Leadership: The elusive factor in organizational
effectiveness (pp. 277-308).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Bass, B. M. (1990). Bass & Stogdill's
handbook of leadership: Theory,
research, & managerial applications. New York: Free Press. Bell, E.L., & Nkomo, S.
(2001). Our separate ways: Black and White women and the struggle for
professional identity. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Bell, K., Orbe, M., Drummond, D.
K., & Camara, S. K. (2000). Accepting
the challenge of centralizing without essentializing: Black feminist thought and African American
women’s communicative experiences. Women’ Studies in Communication, 22,
1, 41-62. Biggart,
N. W., & Hamilton, G. G. (1984). The power of obedience.
Administrative
Science Quarterly, 29(4), 540-549. Browne,
I. (1999). Introduction: Latinas and African American women in the U.S. labor
market. In I. Browne (Ed.), Latinas and African American women at work:
Race, gender, and economic inequality (pp. 1-31). New York: Russell
Sage Foundation. Bullis,
C., & Stout, K. R. (2000). Organizational socialization: A feminist
standpoint approach. In P. Buzzanell, (Ed.), Rethinking organizational & managerial
communication form feminist perspectives (pp. 47-75). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Burns, J. M. (1978).
Leadership. New York:
Harper and Row. Buzzanell, P. M.
(1994). Gaining a voice: Feminist organizational
communication theorizing. Management Communication Quarterly, 7,
339-383. Clair, R.P. (1996).
The political nature of the colloquialism “a real job”: Implications for
organizational socialization. Communication
Monographs, 63, 249-267. Charmaz, K.
Grounded theory: Objectivist and
constructivist methods. In, N. K. Denzin,
& Y. S. Lincoln, (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.), pp. 509-536. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Collins, P H. (1990).
Black
feminist thought: Knowledge,
consciousness, and the politics of empowerment. Boston: Unwin Hyman. Collins, P. H. (1998). Fighting words: Black women
and the search for justice. Minneapolis: University of
Minnesota Press. Conger, A., & Kanungo, N.,
(1988) (Eds.). Charismatic
Leadership: The elusive factor in organizational effectiveness. (pp.
277-308). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Cose, E. (2003,
March 3). The Black gender gap: Black
women are making historic strides on campuses and in the workplace. But their professional progress is making
them rethink old notions of race, class, and romance. Newsweek, 46-55. Cox, T. H. (1993). Cultural diversity in Organizations: theory, research, and practice.
San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Dougherty, D., & Krone, K.
(2000). Overcoming the
dichotomy: Cultivating standpoints in
organizations through research. Women’s Studies in
Communication, 23, 1, 16-40. Duke, L.
(2002). Get real!: Cultural relevance and resistance
to the mediated feminine ideal. Psychology & Marketing, 19(2),
211-233. Englebrecht, A. R.
(1994, March). A feminist perspective of organizational socialization: A game of blindman’s
bluff. Paper presented
at the Western Academy of Management, Santa Fe, NM. Essed,
P. (1994). Contradictory
positions, ambivalent perceptions: A case study of a Black woman entrepreneur. In K. Bhavnani & A. Phoenix (Eds.).
Shifting identities, shifting racisms: A
feminism & psychology reader (pp 99-118). London:
Sage. Farmer, H.S., & Associates (1997). Diversity and women’s career development:
From adolescence to adulthood. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Fordham, S. (1993).
“Those loud Black girls”: Black women, silence, and gender, “passing” in the
academy. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 24(1), 3-32. Gibbons, T. C. (1986).
Revisiting the question of born vs. made: Toward a theory of development of
transformational leaders. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Human and Organization Systems,
Fielding Institute. Gilligan, C., Grossman, H., & Harding, S. (1987). Introduction: is there a feminist method? In S. Harding (Ed.). Feminism & methodology.
Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives.
New York: Cornell University Press. Harrigan, B.
(1977). Games mother never taught
you: Corporate gamesmanship for women. New York: Warner Books. Hartsock, N. (1983). The feminist standpoint: Developing the
ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In
S. Harding & M. Hintikka (Eds.), Discovering
reality (pp. 283-310). Boston: Reidel. Hartsock, N.
(1990). Foucault on power: A theory for women? In L. J.
Nicholson (Ed.), Feminism/postmodernism (pp. 157-175). New York: Routledge. Helgesen,
S. (1990). The female advantage: Women's ways of leadership. New York:
Doubleday. Henning, M, & Jardim, A.
(1977). The managerial women. New York:
Pocket Books. Holcomb-McCoy, C. C., & Moore-Thomas, C. (2001, October). Empowering African American
adolescent females. Professional School Counseling, 5,
19-27. hooks, b. (1981). Ain't I a woman: Black women and feminism. Boston: South End Press. hooks, b. (1990).
Yearning:
Race, gender, and cultural politics. Boston: South End. Jablin, F. M.
(1987). Organizational
entry, assimilation, and exit. In
F. M. Jablin, L. L. Putnam, K. H. Roberts, & L.
W. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of organizational
communication: An interdisciplinary
perspective (pp. 679-740), Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Jablin, F. M.
(2001). Organizational entry, assimilation, and
disengagement/exit. In, F. M. Jablin & L. L. Putnam (Eds.), The
new handbook of organizational communication (pp.
732-818). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jones, M. C. (1992).
Learning to Lead: A study of
the developmental paths of African-American women college presidents. Unpublished dissertation,
The George Washington University. Kotter, J. P.
(1982). The
general managers. New
York: Free press. Ladner, J. (1971). Tomorrow’s
tomorrow. Garden City, NY: Doubleday. Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider.
Trumansburg, NY: The Crossing Press. Mainiero, L.
(1994). Getting
anointed for advancement: The case of executive women. The Academy of Management Executive, 8,
53-68. McAdoo, H. B. (2002). Black children: Social, educational, and
parental environments (2nd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mintzberg, H.
(1973). The
nature of managerial work.
New York: Harper and Row. O’Brien Hallstein, D. L. (1997). A postmodern caring: Feminist standpoint theories, revisioned caring and
communication ethics. Western Journal of Communication, 63(1),
32-56. O’Brien Hallstein, D. L. (2000). Where standpoint stands now: An introduction and
commentary. Women’s Studies in Communication, 23(1),
1-15. O’Hare, P., Pollard, K., Mann, T., & Orbe, M. P.
(1998a). Constructing
co-cultural theory: An explication of
culture, power, and communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Orbe, M.
(1998b). An outsider within perspective to organizational communication:
Explicating the communicative practices of co-cultural group members. Management
Communication Quarterly, 12(2), 230-279. Parker, P. S. & Ogilvie, D.T.. (1996). Gender, culture, and leadership: Toward a
culturally distinct model of African-American women executives' leadership
strategies. Leadership Quarterly, 7(2), 189-214. Parker, P. S. (1997).
African American women executives within dominant culture
organizations: An examination of
leadership socialization, communication strategies, and leadership behavior.
Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Parker, P. S. (2001).
African American Women Executives Within Dominant Culture Organizations: (Re)Conceptualizing notions of instrumentality and collaboration.
Management
Communication Quarterly, 15(1), 42-82. Parker, P. S. (in press). Control, resistance, and empowerment in raced,
gendered, and classed work contexts: The case of African American women. Communication Yearbook 27,
Mahwah, NJ: Earlbaum. Rosener, J. B.
(1990). Ways women lead. Harvard Business Review, 68(6), 11-12. Slevin,
K. F., & Wingrove, C. R. (1998). From stumbling
blocks to stepping stones: The life experiences of fifty professional African
American women. New York: New York University Press. Smith, D. (1987). The everyday world as problematic: A
feminist sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press. Strauss, A.
& Corbin, J. (1990). Basics
of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Tannen, D. (1990). You
just don't understand: Women and men in
conversation. New York: William Morrow. Twine, F. W. (2000). Feminist fairy tales for Black and
American Indian girls: A working-class vision. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 25(4), 1227-1230. Welton, K.
(1997). Nancy Hartsock’s
standpoint theory: From content to “concrete multiplicity.” Women & Politics, 18(3),
7-24. Wood, J. T. (1992). Gender and Moral Voice: Moving form
woman’s nature to standpoint epistemology. Women’s
Studies in Communication, 15, 1-24. Wood, J. T. (1998). Gendered lives: Communication, gender and
culture (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Yukl, G. (2002). Leadership
in organizations (5th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice
Hall. Copyright 2003 Communication Institute for Online Scholarship, Inc. This file may not be publicly distributed or reproduced without written permission of the Communication Institute for Online Scholarship, P.O. Box 57, Rotterdam Jct., NY 12150 USA (phone: 518-887-2443).
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||