The Challenges of Developing a Women in Leadership Program Focused on Getting Women Promoted

• In Event: Illuminating Challenges and Resilience in Women Leaders

Short Description

More universities need to offer programs to facilitate a solution to gender inequality in senior positions of leadership. External financial support is commonly required, but the bigger challenges may be second generation bias, female apathy, and failure to comprehend that gender-neutral leadership programs do not address challenges that are unique to women. This paper describes the journey to secure university interest and implement a sponsored, women in leadership program designed specifically to facilitate the promotion of women.

Detailed Abstract

In 2017 the deans of four universities, who were all male, were contacted with the idea that I wanted to sponsor a women in leadership program. One didn’t reply, another expressed interest, asked for a proposal and then didn’t reply, one asked me to present to a board of trustees, and one actively worked with me to develop a proposal, but this encountered roadblocks.
The invitation to talk to the board of trustees was declined because the proposal would be presented by a male faculty member and it was not going to include program components for second-generation bias or a competitive skills advantages for women. A similar problem was encountered at XXX but it was not intractable. At first, the dean said that the program could not assign any responsibility to men for the paucity of women in senior positions of leadership. When I refused to budge on this it was agreed that the dean would leave program development to a team of women.
In 2017 XXX undertook the task of building a program for women in leadership that would focus on advancing women into senior positions of leadership and would be a model for other universities. The first program would be an Executive Education (EE) program. This was because fewer approvals were required. This would be followed by an MBA program with a minor in women in leadership or a similar title.
To design the program, the university enlisted the help of thirty female business and academicians from the local area (the advisory group). This group was presented with a proposed program that had been crafted by analyzing competitive programs, with insights from practitioners. The initial proposal had traditional MBA subjects taught with a global orientation, patriarchy/second generation bias, work life balance, networking, and using and being a mentor. Noticeably missing were details on how we were going to impart a real competitive skills advantage to the participants, and accommodating patriarchy/second generation bias. The advisory group suggested extra emphasis on communications for a variety of applications, and the development of a career roadmap. This was accommodated.
The first EE course was to begin on September 5, 2018. The format was twelve eight-hour sessions held every third Wednesday. The cost was $4,500. The course was cancelled because we failed to attract enough students. We believe it was in part due to underestimating the impact of second-generation bias, and in part because the marketing, although extensive kicked off late in the process.
This caused a program redesign. Because women were not being given time off, and because most participants were mothers who had obligations for their children on weekends, the program would now meet on six alternating Saturdays, and it would offer a heavier study at home component. There were though some cuts. Nearly everything was scaled back, and some things were cut or really scaled back like networking, negotiations, globalization, second-generation bias, and marketing, and the instructors could decide on incorporating ideas for a competitive advantage. Because fewer employers than expected were reimbursing students for the course the price was cut by nearly 50%.
It was suggested by the sponsor that the implications of second-generation bias could not be discounted or deprioritized because the program could produce the next Jackie Welsh and she still might not be promoted if participants were not equipped to understand the implications of second-generation bias. This invoked a backlash. Patriarchy/second generation bias was categorized as an old asked and answered problem. Female professors threatened to withdraw as instructors in the program and told the dean they would not support the program with this component. Two advisory board members strongly objected to wasting time on a non-issue.
A project was undertaken to research the influence of second-generation bias on getting women promoted. Support for this direction hit a curveball when an instructor notified the group that there was plenty of research on combating second-generation bias and attached an article that was not relevant.
The dean was concerned by the faculty's lack of support for the program but was aware of the commitments made to the sponsor by the university. The dean was also concerned because the sponsor made it clear that the program had no chance of fulfilling its agreed upon objective to facilitate the promotion of women into senior positions of leadership.
In the quandary of having female faculty members unsupportive of a women in leadership program, but the need to honor university commitments the dean asked the sponsor if she could develop a proposed curriculum for a minor in women in leadership, and consider teaching in the program.
The proposed curriculum completely revolved around specific challenges faced by women. This included even more emphasis on second-generation bias and networking and it fully developed the female sources of competitive advantage. It was developed based on practitioner input but heavily relied on documented academic research. By the time of the conference I expect to have an update on this proposed program.
Meanwhile the EE program kicked off on January 12, 2019. Participant feedback on the program will be available at the time of the conference, but data on the program’s success in facilitating the promotion of participants will take time.
At this juncture (January 2019) I re-contacted the two universities that had ignored or rejected my initial proposal for a women in leadership proposal. Both deans responded immediately and asked to speak with me. I expect to have an update on this for the conference.
Gaining traction and implementing a women in leadership program together involved more and different challenges than what was expected. Second-generation bias has been the most surprising, but also the source of significant learning. It’s likely that this bias will influence the availability and effectiveness of universities to address the problem of too few women in senior positions of leadership.

Presenter

• Kathleen Brush, Self