1.0 Introduction

Disparaging feelings toward women in the workplace, society, civil society and

leadership consisted of attitudes such as, “[women] lacked career orientation,

leadership potential and were undependable and emotionally unstable – all of

which made women unsuitable candidates for management and some strategic and

sensitive leadership position.” (Bass, Krusell, & Alexander, 1971).Polls about

women in leadership said that despite executives more favorable view of women,

the majority still think only a truly exceptional woman can succeed in some

leadership role in the world (Sutton & Moore, 1985). The unfounded attitudes we

hold are the larger concern for our understanding of women in leadership. The

presence of feminine or masculine characteristics in leadership styles is related to

the construct of gender (Larson and Freeman, 1997). Gender, race, class, and other

elements of social difference are acknowledged to play an important role in the

development of leadership styles.Recognizing women‟s styles of leadership

represents an important approach to equity as long as they are not stereotyped as

“the” ways women lead but as “other” ways of leading.The feminine leadership

styles are not better or worse than the traditional male-oriented ones, they are just

different.

1.1 Background of study

Enugu state like other states of the federation which is mostly occupied by civil

servants has about 30% of the working population as women, the total number of

women in leadership and some sensitive decision making position in the state are

limited due to the overall effect of femininity, psychology and socialization on

some women in leadership and those aspiring to occupy these leadership positions.

Traits traditionally cited as feminine include gentleness, empathy, and sensitivity,

though traits associated with femininity vary depending on location and context,

greatly influence decision making, judgment and other leadership role played by

women.Because of the socialization process, women have developed values and

beliefs that translate into specific behaviors arising in their leadership styles.

Certain expected behaviors in organizations are explained as the result of the

socialization process that occurs outside the organization‟s borders (Brandser,

1996). For example, women are socialized to show their emotions, feelings,

compassion, patience, and intuition; to help and care for others (Bass and Avolio,

1994; DeMatteo, 1994; Pounder and Coleman,2002); to be listeners (Brunner,

1998); to judge outcomes based on their impact on relationships (Oakley, 2000);

and to lead complex settings in continuous change. Psychology emphasizes the

need to understand individual and group behaviors as a complex system in order to

achieve positive and long lasting change. It recognizes the need to train leaders

who are able to create adaptive rather than superficial change, drawing on Ronald

Heifetz's work on adaptive leadership and the tenets of positive psychology.thr

effect of socialization , femininity and psychology on women in leadership have

significant impact on the country and women empowerment.

1.2 Leadership

According to Norbet M. Ile (1999), he defined leadership as a process where one

exerts social influence over members of a group. Leadership is also the process of

influencing others to work willingly and to the best of there capabilities towards

the goals of the leader. Lester (1980), defined leadership as the knock of getting

other people to follow you and to do willingly the things you want them to do.

Leadership has been defined in many ways, in general, leadership provides the

value and focus of action for other members of a group. This leadership is the

process of influencing other to act so as to accomplish certain goal and objectives.

Ile (1999), narrated that leadership is a display of ability to motivate and to

integrate followers to achieve determined organizational goals.

1.3 Impact of women in leadership and decision-making

Many women especially in developing countries when asked if they would

consider entering leadership and politics, i.e., consider becoming a candidate for an

elective position in public office or appointed to a decision-making position in

government, answer in the negative.Through numerous dialogues and networking

at various governance levels from local to national, regional and international,

many women in developing countries have come to some consensus that politics

has to be transformed, and that political transformation needs the active

involvement of women. Therefore, women who believe in serving the public trust

and can commit to public accountability should enter politics to effect this

transformation.

1.4 Socialization

Is a term used by sociologists, social psychologists, anthropologists, political

scientists and educationalists to refer to the lifelong process of inheriting and

disseminating norms, customs and ideologies, providing an individual with the

skills and habits necessary for participating within his or her own society

(Brandser, 1996). Socialization is thus "the means by which social and cultural

continuity are attained". Socialization describes a process which may lead to

desirable outcomes – sometimes labeled "moral" – as regards the society where it

occurs (Merton,1963). Socialization is the process by which human infants begin to

acquire the skills necessary to perform as a functioning member of their society,

and is the most influential learning process one can experience. Unlike many other

living species, whose behavior is biologically set, humans need social experiences

to learn their culture and to survive. Although cultural variability manifests in the

actions, customs, and behaviors of whole social groups (societies), the most

fundamental expression of culture is found at the individual level. This expression

can only occur after an individual has been socialized by his or her parents, family,

extended family, and extended social networks. This reflexive process of both

learning and teaching is how cultural and social characteristics attain continuity.

Many scientists say socialization essentially represents the whole process of

learning throughout the life course and is a central influence on the behavior,

beliefs, and actions of adults as well as of children (Merton,1963).

1.5 Femininity

Is a set of attributes, behaviors, and roles generally associated with girls and

women. Femininity is socially constructed, but made up of both socially defined

and biologically created factors. This makes it distinct from the definition of the

biological female sex, as both men and women can exhibit feminine traits. Traits

traditionally cited as feminine include gentleness, empathy, and sensitivity, though

traits associated with femininity vary depending on location and context, and are

influenced by a variety of social and cultural. In that century, (Brinjikji, 1999).

1.6 Psychology

Psychology is the study of mind and behavior. It is an academic discipline and an

applied science which seeks to understand individuals and groups by establishing

general principles and researching specific cases. In this field, a professional

practitioner or researcher is called a psychologist and can be classified as a social,

behavioral, or cognitive scientist. Psychologists attempt to understand the role of

mental functions in individual and social behavior, while also exploring the

physiological and biological processes that underlie cognitive functions and

behaviors. Psychologists explore concepts such as perception, cognition, attention,

emotion, intelligence, phenomenology, motivation, brain functioning, personality,

behavior, and interpersonal relationships, including psychological resilience,

family resilience, and other areas. Psychologists of diverse orientations also

consider the unconscious mind.

1.7 Statement of Problem

Research problem is all about academic and societal perplexing questions posed

for solution, it is an intellectual task, not a physical assessment. The impact of

femininity, psychology and socialization on women in leadership is an imperative

one with remarkable affect on women in leadership and others aspiring some

leadership position. This research will not only focus on indept analysis of

femininity, psychology and socialization impact against women leadership and

leadership position in Enugu State Nigeria, but also the reverberation of universal

democratic value on the whole.

Leadership is known as an important part of any developing nation and

organization and yet contemporary Nigeria leadership and political system is male

dominant. These could be as a result of women‟s behavior towards politics, their

roles in leadership when compared with their male counterpart in the Nigeria

society.

Generally an average Nigerian woman believes that their job should not go

beyond domestic activities, child birth and being employed in a job rather than

taking up the challenge involved in leadership. The problem of this present

research puts in some questions like, what are the effect of socialization,

psychology and femininity on some women in leadership and those aspiring to

some strategic leadership position in Enugu state Nigeria.

Chapter Two

2.0 Explanation of Sociological Theory

Sociological theories are statements of how and why particular facts about the

social world are related. They range in scope from concise descriptions of a single

social process to paradigms for analysis and interpretation. Some sociological

theories explain aspects of the social world and enable prediction about future

events, while others function as broad perspectives which guide further

sociological analyses. Sociologists develop theories to explain social phenomena.

A theory is a proposed relationship between two or more concepts. In other words,

a theory is explanation for why or how a phenomenon occurs. An example of a

sociological theory is the work of Robert Putnam on the decline of civic

engagement, Putnam found that Americans involvement in civic life (e.g.,

community organizations, clubs, voting, religious participation, etc.) has declined

over the last 40 to 60 years. Sociological theory is developed at multiple levels,

ranging from grand theory to highly contextualized and specific micro-range

theories. There are many middle-range and micro-range theories in sociology.The

purpose of this chapter is to introduce some of the more well-known and most

commonly used grand and middle-range theories in sociology and also to explore

some use of sociological theories in educational research.

2.1 Importance of Sociological theory in Educational research

Social theory and education research, taking a look at key thinkers and setting out

the relevance of their ideas to education. Mark Murphy provides a keen-eyed

overview of the theories of Derrida, Bourdieu, Foucault and Habermas, in relation

to four key education research issues:

- inequality, inclusion and education

- identities: Notions of educational selves and subjectivities

- teaching and learning: curricular and pedagogical practice

- governance and management: Performativity, audit cultures and accountability.

Sociological theory will offer the education practitioner or researcher a suitable

guide to assist their acquisition and application of social theory, and to develop the

capacity of constructive and effective analysis.Considering the ever increasing

development of qualitative research method in scientific studies especially in social

science, we made an attempt to answer one question; what is the position and

status of sociological theory in qualitative research; regarding its inductive entity?

One cannot deny the role of theory in the structure of literature review in every

individual topic; because it might have been carried out through quantitative

research method, a point that apparently becomes clear once a researcher

concentrates on the literature review. McLeod (2001, p.2) iterated that the primary

aim of qualitative research is to develop an understanding of how the world is

constructed”. Silverman (2001) has stated that researchers who use the qualitative

method for their work commonly believe that they can provide a „deeper‟

comprehension about the social phenomena. Still, qualitative social researches do

not have a unique agreed doctrine underlying them (Silverman, 2001, p. 32). Thus,

for accomplishing the purposes sought within this type of research, a precise

survey of structural elements in qualitative research is desired. One of the issues

which has persistently been raised as a question, and does not find a clear response

in the process of this research is; what is the role and position of sociological

theory in the structural formation of qualitative research? . According to Leedy &

Ormrod (2005), the qualitative research method is used in the following

conditions; (a) when there is rarely any information available about the topic (b)

when the researcher‟s variables are unclear and unknown, and (c) when a relevant

theory base is missing in any sense. As such, qualitative research does not intend to

“test” a hypothesis but this method has a deep tendency to “describe, analyze, and

interpret the constructive aspects of the social world” (Mcleod, 2001, p.133). Since

qualitative researches are inductive, they are evaluated based on the total absence

of any sort of theory (Mitchell & Cody, 1993) and as a result it is method which

helps a researcher construct a useful theory within a research (Leedy & Ormrod,

2005 & Creswell, 2007).

2.2 Importance of Socialization Theory

In the theory proposed above, the astute reader will notice that the theory includes

two components: The data, in this case the findings that civic engagement has

declined and TV watching has increased, and the proposed relationship that the

increase in television viewing has contributed to the decline in civic engagement.

Data alone are not particularly informative. If Putnam had not proposed a

relationship between the two elements of social life, we may not have realized that

television viewing does, in fact, reduce people's desire to and time for participating

in civic life. In order to understand the social world around us, it is necessary to

employ theory to draw the connections between seemingly disparate conce.While

Durkheim's findings have since been criticized, his study is a classic example of

the use of theory to explain the relationship between two concepts. Durkheim's

work also illustrates the importance of theory: without theories to explain the

relationship between concepts, we would not be able to hypothesize cause and

effect relationships in social life or outline processes whereby social events and

patterns occur. And to propose cause and effect relationships and / or outline

processes in social experience are the major components of sociological theory.

Chapter Three

3.0 Relevant Sociological Theories

As noted above, there are many theories in sociology. However, there are several

broad theoretical perspectives that are prominent in the field (they are arguably

paradigms). These theories are prominent because they are quite good at

explaining social life and issues. They are not without their problems, but these

theories remain widely used and cited precisely because they have withstood a

great deal of criticism. As the dominant theories in sociology are discussed below,

you might be inclined to ask, "Which of these theories is the best?" As is often the

case in sociology (as in other scientific disciplines), just because things are

different doesn't mean one is better than another. In fact, it is probably more useful

and informative to view these theories as complementary. One theory may explain

one element of society better than another. Or, both may be useful for explaining

social life. In short, all of the theories are correct in the sense that they offer

compelling explanations for social phenomena. The following social theories will

be used to explain the impact of socialization, femininity and psychology on leader

ship. These theories have been analyzed and criticized to find out the best theory

for theoretical frame work for the research.Structural-Functionalism, Conflict

theory, role theory Symbolic Interactionism are among the relevant sociological

theories used in educational research.

3.1 Conflict Theory

A prominent sociological theory that is often contrasted with structural-

functionalism is conflict theory. Conflict theory argues that society is not best

understood as a complex system striving for equilibrium but rather as a

competition. Society is made up of individuals competing for limited resources

(e.g., money, leisure, sexual partners, etc.).Conflict theory was developed in part to

illustrate the limitations of structural-functionalism. This is contrasted with the

conflict approach, which argues that society is constantly in conflict over

resources. One of the primary contributions conflict theory presents over the

structural-functional approach is that it is ideally suited for explaining social

change, a significant problem in the structural-functional approach.

The following are three primary assumptions of modern conflict theory:

Competition over scarce resources is at the heart of all social relationships.

Competition rather than consensus is characteristic of human relationships.

Inequalities in power and reward are built into all social structures.

Individuals and groups that benefit from any particular structure strive to see

it maintained.

Change occurs as a result of conflict between competing interests rather than

through adaptation. Change is often abrupt and revolutionary rather than

evolutionary.

Conflict theory was elaborated in the United Kingdom by Max Gluckman and John

Rex, in the United States by Lewis A. Coser and Randall Collins, and in Germany

by Ralf Dahrendorf, all of whom were influenced by Karl Marx, Ludwig

Gumplovicz, Vilfredo Pareto, Georg Simmel, and other founders of European

sociology.

3.2 Limitations and critics of Conflict theory

Not surprisingly, the primary limitation of the social-conflict perspective is that it

overlooks the stability of societies. While societies are in a constant state of

change, much of the change is minor. Structural-functionalism focuses on

equilibrium and solidarity; conflict-theory focuses on change and conflict. Keep in

mind that neither is better than the other; when combined, the two approaches offer

a broader and more comprehensive view of society.

3.3 Symbolic Interactionism

Symbolic Interactionism is a theoretical approach to understanding the

relationship between humans and society. The basic notion of symbolic

interactionism is that human action and interaction are understandable only

through the exchange of meaningful communication or symbols. In this approach,

humans are portrayed as acting as opposed to being acted upon.

The main principles of symbolic interactionism are:

1. Human beings act toward things on the basis of the meanings that things

have for them.

2. These meanings arise from ongoing processes of social interaction and

interpretation.

3. Social action results from a "joint action", or the fitting together of

individual lines of action.

According to Symbolic Interactionism, humans are distinct from

infrahumans (lower animals) because infrahumans simply respond to their

environment (i.e., a stimulus evokes a response or stimulus -> response)

whereas humans have the ability to interrupt that process (i.e., stimulus ->

cognition -> response). Additionally, infrahumans are unable to conceive of

alternative responses to gestures. Humans, however, can. This understanding

should not be taken to indicate that humans never behave in a strict stimulus

-> response fashion, but rather that humans have the capability of not

responding in that fashion (and do so much of the time).

In symbolic interactionism, this is known as "reflected appraisals" or "the looking

glass self" and refers to our ability to think about how other people will think about

us. A good example of this is when people try on clothes before going out with

friends. Some people may not think much about how others will think about their

clothing choices, but others can spend quite a bit of time considering what they are

going to wear. And while they are deciding, the dialogue that is taking place inside

their mind is usually a dialogue between their "self" (that portion of their identity

that calls itself "I") and that person's internalized understanding of their friends and

society (a "generalized other" called the "me"). Symbolic Interaction arose through

the integration of Structural Functionalism and Conflict Theories.

3.4 Limitations and critics of symbolic interactionism

The most significant limitations of symbolic interactionism relate to its primary

contribution: it focuses on the ongoing construction and contestation of meanings

in society (e.g., norms, rules, cultures, and interpersonal experiences), which can

only be grasped via examination of small groups or individual beings. As a result,

Symbolic Interactionism typically focuses on "how" things are done (e.g., the ways

people accomplish things that can be observed in real time and in the natural

world) rather than "why" things are done (e.g., hypotheses that can only be

examined within mathematical and / or experimental settings disconnected from

the natural world). As a result, Symbolic Interaction is more adequately suited to

explaining how the world is, but is unable to demonstrate and document

predictions about how the world might be under certain circumstances.

3.5 Role Theory

Another more micro-oriented approach to understanding social life that also

incorporates the more structural elements of society is Role Theory. Role theory

emerged from the integration of Structural and Processual Symbolic Interactionist

insights, and often draws heavily upon both of these theoretical traditions. Role

theory posits that human behavior is guided by expectations held both by the

individual and by other people. The expectations correspond to different roles

individuals perform or enact in their daily lives, such as secretary, father, or friend.

For instance, most people hold pre-conceived notions of the role expectations of a

secretary, which might include: answering phones, making and managing

appointments, filing paperwork, and typing memos. These role expectations would

not be expected of a professional soccer player.

Role Theory includes the following propositions:

1. people spend much of their lives participating as members of groups and

organizations

2. within these groups, people occupy distinct positions

3. each of these positions entails a role, which is a set of functions performed

by the person for the group

4. groups often formalize role expectations as norms or even codified rules,

which include what rewards will result when roles are successfully

performed and what punishments will result when roles are not successfully

performed

5. individuals usually carry out their roles and perform in accordance with

prevailing norms; in other words, role theory assumes that people are

primarily conformists who try to live up to the norms that accompany their

roles

6. group members check each individual's performance to determine whether it

conforms with the norms; the anticipation that others will apply sanctions

ensures role performance

3.6 Limitations and critics of Role theory

Role theory has a hard time explaining social deviance when it does not correspond

to a pre-specified role. For instance, the behavior of someone who adopts the role

of bank robber can be predicted - she will rob banks. But if a bank teller simply

begins handing out cash to random people, role theory would be unable to explain

why (though role conflict could be one possible answer; the secretary may also be

a Marxist-Communist who believes the means of production should belong to the

masses and not the bourgeoisie).Another limitation of role theory is that it does not

and cannot explain how role expectations came to be what they are. Role theory

has no explanation for why it is expected of male soldiers to cut their hair short,

but it could predict with a high degree of accuracy that if someone is a male soldier

they will have short hair. Additionally, role theory does not explain when and how

role expectations change. As a result, role theorists typically draw upon insights

from Symbolic Interaction Theory and Historical Comparative analyses to address

these questions.

3.7 Structural-Functionalism

Structural-Functionalism is a sociological theory that originally attempted to

explain social institutions as collective means to meet individual biological needs

(originally just functionalism). Later it came to focus on the ways social

institutions meet social needs (structural-functionalism). Structural-functionalism

draws its inspiration primarily from the ideas of Emile Durkheim. Durkheim was

concerned with the question of how societies maintain internal stability and survive

over time. He sought to explain social cohesion and stability through the concept

of solidarity. In more "primitive" societies it was mechanical solidarity, everyone

performing similar tasks, that held society together. Durkheim proposed that such

societies tend to be segmentary, being composed of equivalent parts that are held

together by shared values, common symbols, or systems of exchanges. In modern,

complex societies members perform very different tasks, resulting in a strong

interdependence between individuals.The central concern of structural-

functionalism is a continuation of the Durkheimian task of explaining the apparent

stability and internal cohesion of societies that are necessary to ensure their

continued existence over time. Thus, in structural-functionalist thought, individuals

are not significant in and of themselves but only in terms of their social status: their

position in patterns of social relations. The social structure is therefore a network

of statuses connected by associated roles. Structural-functionalism was the

dominant perspective of sociology between World War II and the Vietnam War.

3.8 Limitations and critics to structural-functionalisim

There are a number of criticisms of structural functionalism: it is ahistorical; it is

unable to deal effectively with the process of change or conflict; and it is

conservative. It is viewed as ambiguous and lacking in adequate methods. Inhibits

certain forms of analyses, such as comparative analysis. Structural functionalism

has also been described as both illegitimately teleological and tautological. The

former implies that structural functionalists rely too heavily on the notion that

social structures have purposes or goals.Structural-functionalism has been

criticized for being unable to account for social change because it focuses so

intently on social order and equilibrium in society. As structural-functionalism

thinks about elements of social life in relation to their present function and not

their past functions, structural-functionalism has a difficult time explaining why a

function of some element of society might change or how such change occurs.

However, structural-functionalism could, in fact, offer an explanation in this case.

Another philosophical problem with the structural-functional approach is the

ontological argument that society does not have needs as a human being does; and

even if society does have needs they need not be met. The idea that society has

needs like humans do is not a tenable position because society is only alive in the

sense that it is made up of living individuals.

3.9 Theoretical framework

The foregoing criticism, not withstanding, structural functionalism, or

simply functionalism, is a framework for building theory that sees society as a

complex system whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability. This

approach looks at society through a macro-level orientation, which is a broad focus

on the social structures that shape society as a whole, and believes that society has

evolved like organisms. This approach looks at both social structure and social

functions. Functionalism addresses society as a whole in terms of the function of

its constituent elements; namely norms, customs, traditions, and institutions. The

structural functionalism approach is a macrosociological analysis, with a broad

focus on social structures that shape society as a whole. The macrosociological

approach of functionalism is quite appropriate in discussing an issue like the topic,

this is because socialization, psychology and feminity are all social created out put

of society which emile durkhiem claims is external to the individual hence affects

the individual in this instance the impact on women. Hence this theory will be

adopted for the theoretical frame work of the research.

References

Eagly, A. and Johnson, B.T. (1990), “Gender and leadership style: a meta-

analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 108 No. 2, pp. 233-56.

Eagly, A.H., Karau, S.J. and Johnson, B.T. (1992), “Gender and leadership style

among school principals: a meta-analysis”, Educational Administration Quarterly,

Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 76-101.

Ehrich, L.C. (1994), “Mentoring and networking for women educators”, Women in

Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 4-10.

Evans, G.A. (2001), “The world on our backs”, Community College Journal of

Research and Practice, Vol. 25 No. 2, pp. 181-92.

Feldman, D.C. (1989), “Socialization, resocializatioin and training: reframing the

research agenda”, in Goldstein & Associates, Training and Development in

Organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, p. 376.

Koberg, C. S., Boss, R. W., Senjem, J. C., & Goodman, E. A. (1999). Antecedents

and outcomes of empowerment. Group & Organization Management, 24(1), 71-

90.

Liden, R. C., Wayne, S. J., & Sparrow, R. T. (2000). An examination of the

mediating role of psychological empowerment on the relations between the job,

interpersonal relationships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology,

85, 407-416.

Schein, E.H. (1988). Organizational socialization and the profession of

management. Sloan Management Review, 30, 53-65.

Schein, E.H. (1990). Organizational culture. American Psychologist, 45, 109-119.

Schein, E.H. (1993). Organizational Culture and Leadership (2nd

ed.). San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schneider, B., Goldstein, H.W., & Smith, D.B. (1995). The ASA framework: An

update. Personnel Psychology, 48, 747-773.