The vast majority of political leaders and nearly all Fortune 500 CEOs are men. Moreover, in the industries that make our economy run, such as finance, manufacturing, technology, and agriculture, men are in the super majority of leadership positions. So, if most of our leaders are male, and if the U.S. is the dominant super power and the world's largest economy, how can I claim that we would be better off if women leaders were the majority?
It's simple. Most of our leaders fail. As I've noted earlier, estimates of leader incompetence and failure range from one half to two-thirds. CEO tenure is very short, and most are fired for poor performance. Ethical debacles? Can you name a woman who was involved? Companies are often successful in spite of their poor leadership, because of circumstances (e.g., oil companies discovering vast new oil fields will succeed regardless of poor leadership), the strong performance of U.S. workers because of high levels of education and drive, and government regulations that make businesses highly profitable.
The top scholar on gender and leadership, Dr. Alice Eagly, recently stated that her studies show that women are more likely than men to possess the leadership qualities that are associated with success. That is, women are more transformational than men - they care more about developing their followers, they listen to them and stimulate them to think "outside the box," they are more inspirational, AND they are more ethical. Dr. Bernard Bass, who developed the current theory of transformational leadership, predicts that in the future women leaders will dominate simply because they are better suited to 21st century leadership/management than are men.