Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Title: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Authors: Vanessa Ann Claus (PhD student); Judy R. Sandlin (Assistant Professor); Jamie Callahan (Associate Professor)

Institution: Texas A&M University

Address: 701 Luther West Unit 107, College Station, TX 77840

Email: vanessa1claus@neo.tamu.edu; jrsandlin@tamu.edu; jcallahan@tamu.edu

Stream: Diversity Issues in HRD

Submission type: Full paper

1

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Abstract

Women in the United States workforce commonly hold positions of leadership within nonprofit organizations, as opposed to their male counterparts who typically hold leadership positions within for profit organizations. However, little research has been conducted related to the leadership roles of women within countries that are members of the European Union. The aggregation of American women within feminized positions might be due to the manifestation of cultural gender norms in organizational settings. The purpose of this paper is to examine women in leadership roles within nonprofit and for profit organizations within the European Union and to further investigate a potential correlation between national culture and the role of female leaders, specifically pertaining to Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory (masculinity and femininity). The examination of how women have been empowered to overcome gendered norms within the European Union may provide insight for Human Resource Development practitioners wishing to challenge cultural norms and dominant viewpoints concerning the leadership roles of women.

Keywords: gender; leadership, Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory

Within the global community, many organizations are actively working toward the elimination of workplace inequality, discrimination, and prejudice. Nevertheless, social norms, in regards to gender roles, have not been eradicated. Stereotypical feminine behavior is traditionally associated with non-leadership or support roles. This creates a dichotomy for women who are actively seeking leadership positions-- they feel they must try to balance masculinity, which is valued in leaders, and femininity, which is ascribed to non-leaders (Callahan, Hasler & Tolson, 2005). Guy and Newman (2004) suggest that gendered stereotypes are related to industries that possess soft (feminine) or hard (masculine) skills. It is not surprising, then, that women are still underrepresented as leaders within organizations.

Although women represent approximately 47% of the U.S. workforce, they held only 14.4% of the senior executive positions of Fortune 500 companies and were only 7.6% of the Fortune 500 top earners in 2011 (Chandler, 2011) and, just a year earlier in 2010, they only held 2.4% of the CEO positions within the Fortune 500. According to The White House Project (2009), the non-profit sector comprises approximately 6% of the overall workforce, with 73% of nonprofit employees being women. Since the nonprofit sector is frequently associated with ‘soft” skills which include charity, giving, nurturing, and similar skills, it may be reasonable to assume that gendered stereotypes have been loosened.

2

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

However, within this female-dominated sector, women represent 45% of the Chief Executive Officers and, in those non-profits in which the budget exceeds $25M, only 21% of CEOs are women (TWHP, 2009). The vast majority of nonprofit organizations with budgets less than $5M are found locally and address the arts, children, animal welfare, poverty, and other social initiatives (Van Buren, 2004). This suggests that biases with regard to leadership persist even in the ‘softer’ environment of the nonprofit sector.

To date, a great deal of research has been conducted with regards to women and leadership in organizations within the United States (Van Buren, Pynes, & Reinhold, 2004). This research generally reinforces popular assumptions regarding the conscious and subconscious beliefs about women in leadership positions, which further demonstrates that when women do hold leadership positions, these positions are typically within nonprofit organizations. The literature exploring gendered leadership within the nonprofit sector has been somewhat minimal (Themudo, 2009). Cross-national data on gender and nonprofit organizations suggests a link between empowerment of women and nonprofit participation—the more empowerment afforded women, the stronger the nonprofit sector, and the higher the involvement of women in the sector (Themudo, 2009).

We argue that Themudo’s (2009) study can be taken a step further to look more specifically at the cultures in which the nonprofits are embedded. Thus, we use Hofstede Cultural Dimensions Theory to further investigate masculine/feminine aspects of culture as a lens for gendered leadership within the European Union. More specifically, the research question that guided this study was: Are women in less masculine countries (as defined by Hofstede’s cultural dimension of gender) in the European Union more likely to hold positions in Fortune 500 companies as compared to nonprofit organizations? Through exploring the cultural dimension of gender, masculinity and femininity characteristics, of E.U. countries that possess Fortune 500 organizations, we concluded that perceived leadership abilities/positions closely correlate with gender representation within the for-profit and nonprofit sector.

1. Theoretical Framework

The effects of culture have been long studied by academics in various fields. Recognizing the significance of culture is essential within our global world. Many researchers have attempted to determine the various components associated with culture, yet the debate for a universal definition of culture is still ongoing. Well-cited theorists recognize that culture is a collection of various components that differ from individual to individual, henceforth, what one individual views as a composition of culture is not translated to another individual. Allaire (1984), Bierstadt (1963), Moore (1952), Schein (1997), and many others have developed comprehensive definitions, theoretical frameworks, and models

3

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

related to components that define culture. For the purpose of this study, Hofstede’s definition of culture will be used. Hofstede (1991) defines culture by stating that culture is the “collective programming of the mind…. It is learned, not inherited. Culture derives from one’s social environment, not from one’s genes” (Marquardt, Berger & Loan, 2004, p. 17).

Theorists have long recognized that culture is a collection of various components. While many instruments have been created to determine cultural components (i.e. GLOBE, Trompenaars Hampden- Turner, Kluckhohn & Strodtbeck Values Orientation Theory, etc.), Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory and Values Survey Model (instrument) has remained mainstream.Geert Hofstede, a highly accredited Dutch cultural researcher, began studying the various impacts of national and organizational culture in the late 1960’s during a consulting venture with IBM. Since conducting this initial research for IBM, Hofstede has conducted his study in over 76 countries (Hofstede, 1991). Although Hofstede’s original objective was not to study culture, his research results proved to be unique and reliable related to themes amongst cultures and potential dimensions of culture. Although Hofstede’s research has been criticized, in terms of applicability to all cultural groups, Hofstede used “theoretical reasoning, base data, and statistical treatments to arrive at his conclusion” (Hofstede, Hofstede & Minkov, 2010, xi). Thus, we feel it offers an adequate lens for our purposes in the present study.

Therefore, Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory was used as a theoretical lens for this study. These cultural dimensions explain both societal and organizational constructs and further assist in providing information related to influencing cultural factors. Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory is unique in the sense that it is not limited to a set number of cultural dimensions. In fact, since Hofstede’s development of this theory, additional dimensions have been added. Currently, the dimensions that Hofstede has identified include: power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, and long-term orientation.

Because our interest is in issues of gender and leadership, we focused on the dimension associated with masculinity and femininity. This dimension looks at roles and values related to gender and the gap between men and women. Highly masculine countries in the EU include Hungary and Austria, while more feminine countries include Sweden, Norway, and the Netherlands. More specifically, this study explored the extent to which gender (categorized as masculine and feminine) is correlated with leadership roles in for profit and nonprofit organizations in European Union countries by masculine characteristics.

According to Hofstede et al. (2008), although the roles of gender are defined by societal constraints, the differences between the male and female sexes are universal. The dimension of masculinity/ femininity was recognized second during Hofstede’s initial study. The research conducted thus far by the Values

4

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Survey Model displays the major differences between masculinity and feminine behaviors. Hofstede et al. (2008) recognizes that the masculine pole is often associated with high earnings, constant recognition, opportunity for high-level advancement, and challenging workplace assignments. The feminine pole is often associated with working relationships (cooperation), family importance, and security for one’s future welfare. Traditional and modern day societies are contributing factors to the constraints placed upon males and females. Although Hofstede explains that behaviors are not transferable amongst all individuals, his theories provide foundational themes, which explain common cultural structures. 2. Method

This study uses quantitative methodology to compare nonprofit and for profit gendered leadership within the European Union. The guiding research question for the study was: Are women in less masculine countries (as defined by Hofstede’s cultural dimension of gender) in the European Union more likely to hold positions in Fortune 500 companies as compared to nonprofit organizations? To address this question, we attempted to find answers to the following supporting questions:

Are women more commonly found within leadership positions in nonprofit organizations? Are men more likely to hold leadership positions within for profit organizations? Are less masculine countries more likely to have women in leadership positions within nonprofit and for profit organizations? Are less masculine countries more inclined to have the ratio of men to women distributed similarly within leadership positions? How do these findings relate to the position of women in organizations pertain to cultural and social biases?

2.1 Research Process

The first author began this study by collecting information concerning countries that comprise the European Union. In February of 2011, when this study began, there were 27 countries that comprised the E.U. All members of the E.U. had both for profit and nonprofit organizations. The first author then researched current information regarding global Fortune 500 organizations. During the time this study was conducted, information regarding global Fortune 500 organizations was available, but the most current publication of this list was 2010. The author utilized the CNN Money (2010) report to determine which member countries of the E.U. had global Fortune 500 organizations. After identifying countries on the list of global Fortune 500 companies, noteworthy nonprofit/NGS’s within those countries were identified from an article entitled

5

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

European NGO’s futures: a study of Europe’s leading NGOs and their contribution to policymaking in Brussels.

In accordance with CNN Money’s (2010) article and ENGOF’s article, the following eight countries contain both Global Fortune 500 companies and noteworthy nonprofit organizations: Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. From determining the countries that had Fortune 500 organizations and noteworthy nonprofit organizations, the authors then classified the eight countries into two categories: masculine and feminine. Hofstede et al. (2008) categorize countries according to a masculinity index based upon factor scores from 14 items on the Values Survey Model. Thus, we separated the countries based upon that index score (Hofstede, 2008, p. 141-143) using a 50:50 ratio. The four countries that scored the lowest in terms of masculinity were categorized as feminine countries. Although this 50:50 ratio was a methodological categorization choice, the researchers found that Hofstede et al. (2008) also categorized these countries similarly to the researchers. We then examined organizational websites of for profit and nonprofit organizations to determine the ratio of males to females in leadership positions. All organizational websites that provided information regarding organizational composition (CEOs, CFOs, directors, etc.) were included in the study. Organizations that did not provide information regarding leadership were not included in this study. It is important to note that leadership was defined under the following website categories: Board of Directors, Directors, Board of Governance, and Board of Volunteers.

Upon collecting available information regarding organizational leadership composition, the researchers then calculated the ratio of males to females in leadership positions within each organization. If an organization was comprised of a leadership committee which exceeded a 50:50 ratio, that organization would be categorized accordingly (e.g., Organization X has 10 male leaders and 9 female leaders, thus Organization X is male dominated- 10:9).

Table 2Masculine versus Feminine Countries Country Masculinity Level Masculine or Feminine

Belgium 54 Masculine

France 43 Feminine

Germany 66 Masculine

Italy 70 Masculine

6

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Luxembourg 50 Feminine

Netherlands 14 Feminine

Spain 42 Feminine

United Kingdom 66 Masculine

2.2 Data Analysis

Three separate Chi squared analyses were utilized to determine if differences existed based on organization type (nonprofit / for profit), organizational dominance (masculine / feminine), and cultural dimension based on Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory (masculine / feminine).

The Chi squared noted that there was a significant relationship between organization type (nonprofit / for profit) and organizational dominance (masculine / feminine), χ2(1, N = 51) = 15.35, p = .000. Follow-up examination found that a greater than expected number of male dominated companies were for profit. Likewise, a greater than expected number of female dominated companies were nonprofit. The effect size was .549.

There was no significant difference for organization type (nonprofit / for profit) and cultural dimension based on Hofstede’s Country Dominance (masculine / feminine), χ2(1, N = 62) = 2.33, p = .127. The effect size was .194. There was also no significant difference for organizational dominance (masculine / feminine) and cultural dimension based on Hofstede’s country dominance (masculine / feminine), χ2(1, N = 51) = .43, p = .514. The effect size was .091.

3. Findings

Several patterns concerning the level of female leadership within nonprofit and for profit organizations emerged from this study. The findings pointed to previous research that has been conducted primarily within the United States about the leadership role of women within organizations. The results of this study displayed that women are more likely to hold leadership positions within nonprofit organizations as opposed to for profit organizations. Nevertheless, Hofstede’s Dimensions of Culture, based upon the dimension of gender, did not predict that countries classified as feminine had more women in leadership positions in either nonprofit or for profit organizations.

The research displayed that countries that were classified as masculine were more likely to have for profit organizations than nonprofit organizations. The research also showed countries that were considered to be feminine were more likely to have nonprofit organizations than for profit organizations.

7

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

3.1 Statistical and Practical Significance

The Chi Squared indicated a difference based upon organizational type (nonprofit/ for profit) and organizational dominance (masculine/feminine), χ² (1, N= 51)= 16, P=.000. The practical significance of this study is extremely applicable to modern day misconceptions and beliefs related to gender leadership within organizational sector (for profit versus non-profit). The ratio of organizations dominated by males as compared to females were overwhelming for profit organizations. Additionally, it is important to note that a greater than expected number of nonprofit organizations were dominated by females and a fewer than expected number of nonprofit organizations were dominated by males.

The Chi Squared for organizational type (for profit/nonprofit) and Hofstede’s Cultural Dimension based upon country dominance (masculine/feminine) was not significant, χ² (1, N= 62)= 2.33, P=.127. The Chi Squared for country dominance based upon Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions and organizational dominance (male/female) was not significant, χ² (1, N= 51)= .425, P=.514.

The Chi Squared for country type (masculine/feminine) based upon Hofstede’s Cultural Dimension and organizational type (nonprofit/for profit) was significant, χ² (7, N= 62)= .24.798, P=.001. Country 1, Belgium, had a greater than expected number of nonprofit organizations and a less than expected number of for profit organization. Countries 2 (France- feminine) and 3 (Germany-masculine) also had a greater than expected number of for profit organizations.

4. Discussion

This research reinforced commonly held beliefs pertaining to the social norms relating to the representation of female leaders within both for profit and nonprofit organizations. It important to note that the research also challenged commonly held beliefs about cultural dimensionality and organizational type. “Traditional ‘women’s work’ (such as casework, education, and health care) has been undervalued in part because it is thought of as an extension of women’s family and household responsibilities” (Hayes as cited in Nozawa, 2010).

According to existing research, the leadership of women within nonprofit organizations differs significantly from that of their male counterparts. For example, nonprofit organizations, which typically support a value based mission and vision, are perceived as more likely to employ women in upper level leadership positions due to the soft nature skills that these organizations support and due to the fact that nonprofit organizations are predominantly female (TWHP, 2010). Although the importance of soft skills, typically classified as feminine, are instrumental within organizations, this is not to say that women

8

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

working within nonprofit organizations are equally represented on leadership teams. In fact, the findings presented here suggest that women are also underrepresented in leadership positions within the European Union nonprofit sectors. Nevertheless, women are more likely to be leaders within nonprofit organizations compared to for profit organizations.

Many researchers have noted (Deuax & Kite, 1993; Weber & Crocker, 1983; Hilton & von Hippel, 1996) the prevalence of stereotypes and the deeply rooted societal constructs that these stereotypes reinforce. Although much advancement is being made in terms of the role of women within leadership positions, this does not eradicated the durability and transferability of stereotypical viewpoints amongst cultures and groups of individuals. While challenging the dominant paradigm is essential in moving towards change, Hilton & von Hippel (1996) recognize the vast implications of disproving the status quo rather than reinforcing cultural norms.

In a 1996 survey, Gary & Katz state, “A 1996 survey of 188 of the U.S.’s richest nonprofits conducted by the Chronicle of Philanthropy found that women made up just 16% of the chief executives surveyed. Not only were there fewer female executives, but their median salary was almost $30,000 less than the average male executive” (p. 36). Whereas organizations within the profit generating sector (business, economics, etc.) are more likely to employ males who conform to the masculine norm.

5. Limitations

Though the statistical and practical significance results of this study suggest important correlations, there are some recognizable limitations that should be addressed. This study was limited to 8 countries out of the possible 27 countries that comprise the European Union. Additionally, although the vast majority of these countries have flourishing economies, most of these economies did not support Global Fortune 500 organizations. Additionally, it is important to note that the 8 countries which did have Global Fortune 500 organizations were much more industrialized, thus reflecting business practices similar to that of the United States of America. A greater sample of Fortune 500 organizations and nonprofit organizations could have possibly yielded more statistically significant findings.

A second limitation of this study is that leadership within nonprofit and for profit organizations can differ in terms of contextual meaning. Failure to initially define the criterion associated with leadership led to a struggle between determining if leadership should be defined by a Board of Executives, Directors, Operational Specialists, etc. Additionally, the role of leaders within nonprofit and for profit organizations also differed in terms of roles and responsibilities. Although an individual might be referred to as a leader by holding a position within an organization does not mean that individual is employed by that organization.

9

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Being a leader on the Board of Executives within for profit organization could be considered to be different than leadership within nonprofit organizations. Often times, leadership within for profit organizations was limited to a Board of Executives while leadership in nonprofit organization was expanded to a Board of Governance or Board of Volunteers. Thus, when it came to categorizing leadership, it was difficult to differentiate the commonalities and differences between these various boards.

It is important to note that information regarding organizational leadership was solely located through the use of the World Wide Web. Although of the organizations listed in CNN Money’s (2010) article and ENGOF’s article claim to have updated websites, it is difficult to verify that information. Thus, the data used in this study could be incomplete or inaccurate.

Lastly, differentiating between nonprofit organizations from nongovernmental organizations was not possible for this study. From the data used in the present study, a clear difference between these organizations could not be made. All nonprofit and nongovernmental organizations were categorized under the heading of nonprofit organizations. It is important to recognize that the manner in which these organizations are defined could alter the number of countries that were included in this study.

6. Implications

Although Bem (1975) explains that gender stereotypes pose great inaccuracy, the concept of masculinity versus femininity still upholds years after Bem’s study. Schein (2001) determined that when individuals think of managers, they first think of males; hence, here findings “think manager- think male.” Unfortunately, many still believe that females possess “feminine leadership styles” thus reinforcing misconceptions and stereotypes.

Women advance more slowly within the workplace environment and are less likely to hold leadership positions within organizations than males (Bem, 1974; U.S. Department of Labor, 1983). Although many support the idea of workplace equality, underlying assumptions are frequently made which impede the path of female success. The assumptions being made about women’s roles within the workplace revolve around a variety of aspects including sector of employment type, competencies based upon gender, soft/hard skills, etc. Gender itself has nothing to do with effective leadership. Instead, effective leaders are those who can balance being people and task oriented (Callahan, Hasler and Tolson, 2005, p. 515).

The climb to organizational leadership that women journey upon is much different than that of their male counterparts. The female journey is focused upon reinforcing feminine characteristics such as nurture, passion, respect, etc.

10

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

(Callahan, Hasler and Tolson, 2005, p. 515). Males typically excel within organizational environments at a quicker pace than females due to the fact that they are perceived to embody characteristics that are seen as respectable, logical, and profitable (Schein, 2001). Executive leadership positions for women will continue to be elusive until societal norms are challenged and marginalization, whether purposeful or not, is addressed.

6.1 Reinforcement of Stereotypes

Globally, the suppression of women differs to various degrees. In fact, each culture possesses common perceptions related to gender roles, but that is not to say that roles within cultures are entirely similar. However, there are a number of similarities between the inequalities that women face within the United States and the European Union in relationship to organizational leadership. Both males and females are expected to conform to their society’s biases surrounding the perception of masculinity and femininity. Those who fail to conform to these common viewpoints of masculine and feminine traits are often seen as outsiders, making the journey toward acceptance and achievement challenging. Ford (2006) explains that regardless of organizational sector, women face a difficult journey within the workplace. Ford further expanded his research to explain that women within the workplace continue to lag behind men in terms of rank, positionality, leadership, etc.

“Women are damned if they become leaders because they no longer fit the social construct of femininity and damned when they are perceived to be feminine because they are believed to lack the masculine sex-traits necessary to be successful in leadership” (Eagly, Karai, Glick as cited in Van Buren, 2004, p. 17). Further examination of the literature shows a systematic oppression of women. The structures that are in place are male dominated and thus, the journey towards upper level management, as described by Riedel (Karsten, 2006), is more tedious for women since the leaders determining a woman’s fate are typically males.

Organizations have unintentionally, and sometimes intentionally, devalued the work of female leaders through their underrepresentation in upper level management or their equal representation within various organizational sectors. As Adler (Karsten, 2006) states, “Change, whether societal or organizational, whether sweeping or subtle, requires tremendous courage.” From a feminist perspective, we believe that critically reflecting upon gender differences in relationship to leadership is essential. The first step in correcting the injustices that women face within the workplace is acknowledgement that gender is a product of culture while sex is biologically determined, thus, acknowledgement and understanding of this basic principle can lead to progression in all aspects of society which reinforce the underrepresentation of females.

11

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

6.2 Business Case for Diversity

“Organizational, or corporate, cultures have been a fashionable topic in the management literature since the early 1980s” (Hofstede, Hofstede & Minkov, 2010, p. 47). Globalization has flattened borders and boundaries, thus increasing access to various cultures. As globalization continues to break down invisible boundaries and diminishes borders, the need for becoming culturally competent employees and world citizens has become more prominent than ever. Many organizations based in the United States have become transnational enterprises, thus increasing the importance of cultural competence in terms of international relations and organizational development. Hofstede et al. (2010) noted that, “…unintended conflicts often arise during intercultural encounters…which happen although nobody wants them and all suffer from them” (Hofstede, Hofstede and Minkov, 1996). In order to improve international relations, it is extremely important that organizations understand how culture affects their interpretation of the world and social norms. To make a business case for diversity, it is first essential to acknowledge that all cultures are different. Cultures embody various aspects and no two cultures are alike. Organizations that fall into the mainstream of what might be socially acceptable for their country might fall outside of the acceptable bounds of social normalities within other cultures.

Diversity within any organization setting is essential to promoting creativity, culture awareness, profitability, etc. (McLeod, Lobel & Cox, 1996). Homogenous groups of individuals typically do not challenge or critique conventional ideas of others, thus resulting in lack of differentiated opinions that can affect the bottom line of any business. While diversity practices are essential, it is important to note that individuals should be developed based upon their merit rather than the stereotypical gender roles that they might embody, as Adler (Karsten, 2006) states, “As we have always known, but perhaps conveniently forgotten in other eras, our task is to seek out and grow the types of leaders our time in history requires, not to inequitably prejudice either men or women as a ready-made, guaranteed solution.”

7. Conclusion

In conclusion, we found that the patterns of women in leadership within the EU were similar to patterns found in studies within the U.S. In other words, women were more likely to hold leadership positions within nonprofit organizations. However, a country’s cultural classification as ‘feminine’ did not predict a higher level of women in leadership positions in general. Instead, the findings showed that feminine countries were more likely to have more nonprofit organizations and masculine countries were more likely to have more for profit organizations.

12

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

This study scratches the surface of a global issue that could be further examined to better understand the positionality of women in global leadership. We contend that the leadership status of women within organizations (nonprofit and for profit) worldwide is a worthwhile topic to further analyze and understand. In addition, the findings associated with the ratio of for profit and nonprofit organizations by country classification is another avenue for further exploration.

References

AEGON Group. (2011, April 19). Members: AEGON group. Retrieved from http://www.aegon.com/Home/Governance/Management-Board/Members/

Allianz. (n.d.). Board of management. Retrieved from http://www.allianz.be/allianz/en/who/direction.asp

Amnesty International. (2011). International executive committee. Retrieved fromhttp://www.amnesty.org/en/who-we-are/our-people/international-

executive- committee

ArcelorMittal. (n.d.). Arcelormittal- About- Management. Retrieved from http://www.arcelormittal.com/index.php?lang=en&page=414

13

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Aviva. (2011). Aviva- corporate governance. Retrieved from http://www.aviva.com/investor-relations/corporate-governance/board-of-directors/?category=Executive

AXA. (2011). Corporate governance. Retrieved from http://www.axa.com/en/governance/structure/management/

Barclays. (n.d.). Barclays. Retrieved from http://group.barclays.com/Home

BASF. (n.d.). Board of executive directors. Retrieved from http://www.basf.com/group/corporate/en/about-basf/corporate-management/board/index

Beale, R.L., Thompson, H., Hollenshead, C., Kaufmann, S., & Gibbs, T. (2008). Job satisfaction in nonprofit female executive directors: the significance of shared goals vs. congenial colleagues. Review of Business Research, 8(5), 107-115.

Bernardi, R.A., Bosco, S.M., & Vassill, K.M. (2006). Does female representation on boards of directors associate with fortune's “100 best companies to work for” list?. Business Society, 45(1), 235-248.

BEUC. (2011, April 27). The European consumers' organization. Retrieved from http://www.beuc.org/Content/Default.asp?PageID=1089

Bierema, L. L. (1999). A model of executive women’s learning and development. Adult Education Quarterly , 49(2), 107-121.

Bloomsburg Business Week. (2011, April 28). Assicurzioni Generali. Retrieved from http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/people/people.asp?tick

er=G:I M

BNP Paribas. (n.d.). The general management. Retrieved from http://bank.bnpparibas.com/en/pid2577/the-general-management.html

BP. (n.d.). The board- governance- BP. Retrieved from http://www.bp.com/managedlistingsection.do?categoryId=9021801&conte

ntId=7 040608

BPCE. (2010). Supervisory board/ Corporate governance. Retrieved from http://www.bpce.fr/en/the-group/corporate-governance/supervisory-board

Brainy Quotes. (n.d.). Margaret Mead quotes. Retrieved from http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/m/margaret_mead.html

Callahan, J. L., & Tomaszewski, L. (2007). Navigating the good ol’ boys club: Women, marginality, and communities of practice in a military non-profit organization. Studies in Continuing Education, 29(3), 259-276.

14

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Callahan, J.L., Hasler, M., and Tolson, H. (2005). Perceptions of emotion expressiveness: Gender differences among senior executives. Leadership and Organizational Development Journal, 26(7), 512-528.

Can Europe. (2011). Team and contacts. Retrieved from http://www.climnet.org/about-us/teamandcontacts

Carli, L.L., & Eagly, A.H. (2001). Gender, hierarchy, and leadership: an introduction. Social Issues, 57(4), 629–636.

Clark, C.J. (2005). The xx factor in the boardroom: why women make better directors. Directors Monthly, Retrieved from http://www.boyden.com/es/media/11/the_xx_factor_in_the_boa.pdf

Carrerfour. (2011). The executive board- Carrefour. Retrieved from http://www.carrefour.com/cdc/group/governance-structure/carrefour-group-management/carrefour-group-management-folder/the-executive-board.html

Chandler, D. (2011). What women bring to the exercise of leadership. Journal ofStrategic Leadership, 3(2), 1-12.

Clearly Culture. (2009, July 11). Culture clash. Retrieved from http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-hofstede-cultural-

dimensions/individualism/

CNN Money. (2010, July 26). Global 500 2010: Europe. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2010/europe/

CNP. (n.d.). CNP assurances. Retrieved from http://www.cnp.fr/eng/CNP_Assurances/Management/Management.htm#Article5

Consumer International. (2011). Consumers international: Our team. Retrieved from http://www.consumersinternational.org/who-we-are/our-team

Credit Agricole. (2011, March). Executive committee. Retrieved from http://www.credit- agricole.com/en/Finance-and-Shareholders/Corporate-governance/Executive- committee

Daimler. (n.d.). The board of management. Retrieved from http://www.daimler.com/dai/bom

Deutsche Bank. (2011). Duetsche bank- management board. Retrieved from http://www.db.com/ir/en/content/management_board.htm

Dexia. (2011). Dexia in 3 minutes. Retrieved from http://www.dexia.com/e/discover/management_board2.php

15

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Deutsche Post DHL. (2011, March 14). Deutsche Post DHL: Board of Management. Retrieved from http://www.dp-dhl.com/en/investors/corporate_governance/board_of_management.html

Earthwatch Worldwide, Initials. (2011). Earthwatch Worldwide. Retrieved from http://www.earthwatch.org/

ECEAE. (2011). ECEAE: Welcome to the ECEAE. Retrieved from http://www.eceae.org

EDF Energy. (2011). EDF energy: Board of directors. Retrieved from http://www.edfenergy.com/about-us/about-edf-energy/our-structure/board-

of- directors.shtml

Enel. (2005, May 30). Board of directors- Enel.com. Retrieved from http://www.enel.com/en-GB/group/governance/board/

ENGOF. (2008). A study of Europe’s leading NGOs and their contribution to policymaking in Brussels. Executive Summary: SIGWatch, Retrieved from

http://www.sigwatch.com/fileadmin/Downloadable_PDFs/ENGOF.pdf

ENI. (n.d.). ENI- corporate governance. Retrieved from http://www.eni.com/en_IT/governance/corporate-governance.shtml

E.ON. (2011). E.ON- management team. Retrieved from http://www.eon-energy-trading.com/cms/en/structure.jsp

Eurogroup for Animals. (2011, March 17). Eurogroup for animals- contact. Retrieved from http://www.eurogroupforanimals.org/about/contact.htm

European Environment Bureau. (2011). Welcome to the EEB. Retrieved fromhttp://www.eeb.org/

Fiat. (2011). Fiat. Retrieved from http://www.fiat.com/cgi-bin/pbrand.dll/FIAT_COM/home.jsp

Ford, J. (2006). Discourses of leadership: Gender, identity and contradiction in a UK public sector organization. Leadership, 2(1), 77-99.

Friends of the Earth. (2011). Our staff: friends of the earth. Retrieved fromhttp://www.foe.org/our-staff

GDFSUEZ. (n.d.). GDFSUEZ: Operational organization. Retrieved from http://www.gdfsuez.com/en/group/operational-organization/operational-organization/

Global Witness. (2011). About Global Witness. Retrieved from http://www.globalwitness.org/about-us

16

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Greenpeace. (2011). European unit staff: Greenpeace. Retrieved fromhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eu-unit/en/about/staff/

Guy, M. E. & Newman, M. A. (2004). Women’s jobs, men’s jobs: Sex segregation and emotional labor. Public Administration Review, (64)3, 289-298.

Health Action International (HAI). (2011). HAI. Retrieved from http://www.haiweb.org/

Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G.J., & Minkov, M. (1996). Cultures and organizations, software of the mind: Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival. New York, NY: McGraw- Hill.

HSBC. (n.d.). HSBC- the world's local bank. Retrieved from http://www.hsbc.com/1/2/

Human Rights Watch. (2011). Human rights watch. Retrieved from http://www.hrw.org/en/europe/central-asia

ITIM International. (n.d.). Geert Hofstede™ cultural dimensions. Retrieved from http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_united_kingdom.shtml

ING Group. (2011, March 15). Executive board members- ING. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ing.com/group/showdoc.jsp

Johnston, D., & Rudney, G.C. (1987). Characteristics of workers in nonprofitorganizations. Monthly Labro Review, 110(7), 28-33.

Kawakami, C., White, J.B., & Langer, E.J. (2000). Mindful and masculine: Freeing women leaders from the constraints of gender roles. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 49-63.

Karsten, M. F. (2006). Gender, race, and ethnicity in the workplace. (1 ed., Vol. 1-3). Praeger Publishers: Westport, CT.

Legal & General. (n.d.). Legal & General- Group board. Retrieved from http://lgen.client.shareholder.com/investors/board.cfm

Lloyds Banking Group. (n.d.). Lloyds Banking Group- directors. Retrieved from http://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/about_us/directors/board_directors.asp

McLeod, P. L., Lobel, S. A., & Cox, T. H. (1996). Ethnic diversity and creativity in small groups. Small Group Reearch, 27(2), 248-264. Retrieved from

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/68515/2/10.1177_1046496496272003.pdf

Metro. (2011, March 30). Board of directors. Retrieved from http://www.metro.net/about/board/executives/

17

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

Munich Re. (n.d.). Munich re- board of management. Retrieved from http://www.munichre.com/en/group/management/board_of_management/d

efault .aspx

Mirvis, P.H., & Hackett, E.J. (1983). Work and work force characteristics in the nonprofit sector. Monthly Labor Review, 106(4), 3-12.

Netwerk Vlaanderen. (2011). Netwerk Vlaadneren. Retrieved from http://www.netwerkvlaanderen.be/en/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=87

Nozawa, J.T. (2010). The glass ceiling of nonprofits: a review of gender inequality in the U.S. nonprofit organization executives. Center for Public Policy.

Oakley, J.G. (2000). Gender-based barriers to senior management positions: understanding the scarcity of female CEOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(4), 321- 334.

Oxfam International. (2011). About us: Oxfam International. Retrieved from http://www.oxfam.org/about

Penzenstadler, N. (2011, April 27). Census: Women continue surge past men in higher education. Retrieved from http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/news/article_52ae4794-7071-11e0-b43d-001cc4c03286.html

Perriton, L. (2009). “We don’t want complaining women!” A critical analysis of the business case for diversity. Management Communication Quarterly, 23(2), 218-243.

Pesticide Action Network. (2010). Pan Europe: about us. Retrieved from http://www.pan-europe.info/About/board.html.

Peugeot. (n.d.). Organizational chart. Retrieved from http://www.theofficialboard.com/org-chart/peugeot

Prudential. (2011). Prudential- Leadership. Retrieved from http://www.prudential.com/view/page/public/15293

Pynes, J.E. (2000). Are women underrepresented as leaders of nonprofit organizations? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 20(2), 35-49.

RBS. (n.d.). The Royal Bank of Scotland. Retrieved from http://www.rbs.co.uk/

Reinhold, B. (2005). Smashing glass ceiling: why women still find it tough to advance to the executive suite. Journal of Organizational Excellence, 10(1), 43-55.

18

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

RWE AG. (2011). RWE AG- board of management. Retrieved from http://www.rwe.com/web/cms/en/258312/essent/company/board-of-management/

Santander. (n.d.). Santander. Retrieved from http://www.santander.com/csgs/Satellite?pagename=SANCorporativo/GSDistribuidora/SC_Index

Shaiko, R.G. (1996). Female participation in public interest nonprofit governance: yet another glass ceiling. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 25(3), 302-320.

Shell. (n.d.). Shell global homepage. Retrieved from http://www.shell.com/

Siemens. (n.d.). Management & corporate structure. Retrieved from http://www.siemens.com/about/en/management-structure.htm

Singh, V., Winnicombe, S., & Johnson, P. (2001). Women directors on top UK boards. Unpublished manuscript, Cranfield School of Management, Cranfield University, Bedford, UK. Retrieved from https://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk/bitstream/1826/4057/1/Women_directors

_on_to `p _UK_boards_%202000.pdf

Societe Generale Group. (2009). Societe Generale Group. Retrieved from http://www.societegenerale.com/en/about-us/corporate-governance/-societe-generale-board-directors.

Swan, E. (2008). ‘You make me feel like a woman’: Therapeutic cultures and thecontagion of femininity. Gender, Work, and Organization, 15(1),

88-107.

Telefonica. (2010, September). Telefonica- About Telefonica. Retrieved from http://www.telefonica.com/en/about_telefonica/html/estrucorganiz/equipdirect.shtml

Tesco. (n.d.). Tesco. Retrieved from http://www.tesco.com/

Total. (2009, July 4). Total.com- Group organization. Retrieved from http://www.total.com/en/about-total/group-presentation/governance/organisation-940526.html

Transparency International. (2010). About Transparency. International. Retrieved from http://www.transparency.org/about_us

Transport and Environment. (2010). Staff and board: transport and environment. Retrieved from http://www.transportenvironment.org/pages/staff-and-board/

19

Running Head: Culture and Leadership: Women in Non-Profit and For Profit Leadership Positions within the European Union

UniCredit. (2009, June 17). Board of directors- Unicredit. Retrieved from http://www.unicreditgroup.eu/en/Governance/Board_of_Directors.htm

U.S. Census Bureau. (2011, February 23). International database. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/ipc/www/idb/rank.php

Van Buren, J.A. (2004). Everywhere except on top: women executives in the nonprofit sector. Unpublished manuscript, Department of Management, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland , Ohio. Retrieved from http://digitalcase.case.edu:9000/fedora/get/ksl:weaedm202/weaedm202.pdf

Velp. (2011). Geert Hofstede cultural dimensions. Retrieved from http://www.geert- hofstede.com/

Vodafone. (2010). Executive committee- Vodafone. Retrieved from http://www.vodafone.com/content/index/investors/management/executive_committee.html

Volkswagen. (2011). Board of management. Retrieved from http://www.volkswagen.com/vwcms/master_public/virtualmaster/en2/unternehmen/board_of_management.html

20