Introduction to special issue: women and leadership in public relations

Abstract

Leadership and women in public relations is not on the mainstream research agenda. For example, a systematic literature review conducted in 2019 analyzed 223 papers on women in public relations from a period between 1982 and 2019, discovering a large focus on women’s experiences in their careers, such as the glass ceiling, pay gap and other gender-related barriers. Only very few studies specifically tackled leadership, and in that, these papers mainly focused on how women lead (Topić et al., 2020), which has been a focus of scholarly inquiry on women and leadership since pioneering studies into this issue (Aldoory, 1998; Aldoory & Toth, 2004). This is not to say that leadership in public relations is a largely unexplored area in general terms. For example, the Plank Center in the United States conducts globally renowned research into leadership in public relations and also collects information on public relations and leadership scholarship. But, when Plank’s list of articles and book chapters on leadership is reviewed (The Plank Center, n.d.), then a gap in women’s experiences again shows. This is changing, however, with more scholars expressing interest in this area. For example, a recent book by U.S. scholars Juan Meng and Marlene Neill (who are also authors of two articles in this issue) tackles women and leadership with a focus on ethics and breaking into leadership positions (Meng & Neill, 2021). In Europe, the EUPRERA project on “Women in Public Relations” looked specifically into leadership (along with lived experiences and office culture), and findings showed inequalities and barriers women face. For example, in a study on women and leadership in public relations in England, Topić (2020) found that women struggle to progress to leadership positions and when they do, they face a Catch-22: When women are too soft they are not seen as managerial material but when they are tough then they are labeled as “bitches,” the term also being mentioned among interviewees who do not hold managerial positions. The findings in the same study also showed that women who spent time with boys embraced (stereotypically) masculine characteristics such as toughness, assertiveness and directness, and these women progressed to leadership positions more easily. Socialization influences managerial preferences, so women who grew up socializing with girls usually prefer working for women managers, whereas women who grew up socializing with boys prefer working for men, with both groups of women disapproving of masculine women. In a Croatian study, Polić and Holy (2020) found that women who grew up with fathers and masculine mothers embraced masculine leadership styles, whereas women who grew up socializing with mothers or with both parents embraced feminine leadership styles; both groups preferred working for men with early experiences being linked to spending time with parents rather than peer groups as it was shown in an English case study (Topić, 2020). However, in Greece, women demonstrated the so-called “gyno-androus” leadership characterized by both masculine (self-confidence, planning and decisiveness) and feminine (emotional intelligence and empathy) traits, and also tend to support egalitarian and supportive leadership to prove their competencies (Triantafillidou & Yannas, 2021). These findings and the diversity of conclusions, along with different cultural contexts in which the studies were conducted, show the complexity of leadership and distinctive issues women face, justifying further research into this issue.