Written by Kirstein Velasquez

I’m sure you have encountered the phrase “glass ceiling” at least once in your life. You may have heard it from the news about gender disparity in the workplace or read about it in magazines or scholarly journals discussing discrimination of minorities in organizations. But have you encountered the phrase “glass cliff”?

It sounds pretty dangerous, especially if one examines it literally. That’s risky, standing at the edge of a tall, clear glass with nothing but vast space waiting for you below. But no, that’s not the exact definition of this phrase. However, you can see some resemblance of my aforementioned statements to the reality it pertains to.

Glass cliff is a phenomenon referring to an organization in crisis appointing a female leader to save it (Zenger & Folkman, 2020). “When women are finally given a chance to prove themselves in a senior position, they are handed something that is already broken and where the chances of failure are high” (Zenger & Folkman, 2020).

The mere fact that a phrase is coined to describe this behavior in organizations only shows how this happens frequently. I’ve heard how female leaders are weak and soft leaders to last me a lifetime. In fact, significant figures in the Philippines have no qualms in making such statements like this. But if female leaders really are weak and soft, how come they experience standing at the edge of the “glass cliff”? Are they, perhaps, significantly more competent to lead during a crisis?

In celebration of International Women’s Month, we take a look at how stereotypical women’s qualities and behaviors become vital factors in surviving a crisis and, more specifically, how they reacted to the pandemic and how these can reflect future situations.

Women are soft-hearted and caring.

Women being soft-hearted and caring reflect our current reality. Our mothers love to tend to even our smallest wounds and scratches. They fret over us when we have a fever or a minor cold. Men call it overreacting, I’d like to call it precautionary measures.

Given this same principle, we’ve seen the countries that closed the borders and employed health precautionary measures at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic share one common thing: they have female leaders. For example, Tsai Ing-wen in Taiwan introduced “124 measures to block the spread without having to resort to the lockdowns that have become common elsewhere” as early as January 2020 (Wittenberg-Cox, 2020).

Another example is New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who immediately closed their country’s borders from foreigners and required self-isolation from people who entered New Zealand very early on (Wittenberg-Cox, 2020).

These female leaders acted fast in preventing the spread of the virus the same way our mothers do everything just to make us feel better from common colds.

In comparison, many male leaders resorted to denial and underestimation of the havoc the virus would cause. This caused delayed boundary restrictions, lousy contact tracing efforts, and the spread of misinformation.

Women know when to ask for help and consult experts.

If we are sick, our mothers’ instinct includes going to the doctor even for the most minor discomfort of their children, which is in direct contrast with fathers who will do everything in their power to not see a doctor.  

In organizations such as the government, it is important to appoint capable leaders in positions that require expertise and knowledge. The medical sector needs a physician leader or someone who has an understanding of health policies. The budget management department needs a leader who is revered in the accounting or economics fields.

Women know how to listen and be sympathetic.

Organizations need a leader who listens and sympathizes. They need someone who understands that perhaps not all policies serve the benefit of the majority and they do more harm than good. They need a leader who knows how to accommodate and compromise for the good of their organization.

Are these descriptions familiar to you? Some of these are criticized by male leaders because they believe these only show weakness and indecisiveness. But when is changing your decision to improve the life of your subordinates or subjects a sign of weakness?

 In fact, being stubborn and hard-headed to a fault are a reflection of one’s insecurity about their power, that imposing rules not to serve the greater good but to feed their ego becomes their main objective every time.

To summarize, I presented the stereotypical statements used to describe women and their weaknesses. A woman’s care and soft-heartedness, her willingness to ask for help, and her ability to listen and understand can all be viewed as great leadership qualities that can save an organization—or even a country—from a crisis.

The glass cliff can be dangerous. But it opens up opportunities for great female leaders to come forward and change the course of an entire organization, or even better, an entire nation.

This is a reminder that as women are pushed to the edge, they know how to stand their ground and stare at where they will fall onto with no fear and hesitation.

References

Wittenberg-Cox, A. (2021, December 10). What Do Countries With The Best Coronavirus Responses Have In Common? Women Leaders. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/avivahwittenbergcox/2020/04/13/what-do-countries-with-the-best-coronavirus-reponses-have-in-common-women-leaders/?sh=bd5aaf03dec4

Zenger, J., & Folkman, J. (2020, April 13). Research: Women Are Better Leaders During a Crisis. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/12/research-women-are-better-leaders-during-a-crisis