The “Confidence Gap” and Women’s Leadership Potential

There is no doubt about it, in the past fifty years women have come a long way towards reaching equality in the work force. Currently, although not as well paid as men, women are well represented in academia and the professional work force in numbers reaching parity with men (Pew Research, Aug 25, 2008). In the highest echelons of corporate and political leadership, however, women’s representation is pretty dismal: 2% of all CEOs, 16% of all U.S. senators, 17% in the House of Representatives, 16% of all governors, and 24% of all state legislators. The cause of this disparity, it has been suggested recently, is a “confidence gap” (Kay & Shipman, 2014) in women, despite equal or even, superior qualifications. Several main behavior differences noted are women’s lack of assertiveness, reticence for risk taking, and the tendency to undervalue their contributions. What is confidence, anyway? Do we learn it? It is innate? Is it genetically or, hormonally determined? Can it be taught?

In this article, I am going to briefly touch upon some of the current psychological and sociological thinking about the formation of confidence in men and women. In another article, “The Confidence Gap” in Women: A Depth Psychology Perspective, I discuss the development of confidence in women from a Jungian Depth Psychology perspective.

Studies suggest that nature as well as nurture plays a hand in determining confidence in men and women. High testosterone (major hormone present in males) levels are tied to increased risk taking but decreased ability to collaborate, whereas estrogen (major hormone present in females) encourages bonding and connection and discourages conflict and risk taking. While scientific research (Greven & Plomkin, Psychological Science, Jun 2009) strongly indicates there is a genetic component to innate confidence levels, others such as Olivia Fox Cabane argue that confidence and charisma can be taught (“The Charisma Myth,” 2012). Indeed, in support of this position, Carol S. Dweck author of Mindset: The New Psychology of Success (2006) has explored ways in which the praise girls receive in elementary school for good, compliant behavior actually teaches them the opposite: to avoid taking risks and making mistakes. These are experiences which are known to build perseverance and confidence. For example, boys in the younger grades, with less fully developed impulse control, attention span and later development of fine-motor skills, are scolded far more frequently than girls. Dweck argues that this has the developmental benefit of teaching them greater resilience to failure and criticism. (As an elementary and middle school teacher for a number of years, I can personally attest to the accuracy of her statements!) She also points out different patterns of feedback offered to boys and girls. “Boys’ mistakes are attributed to a lack of effort….Girls come to see mistakes as a reflection of their deeper qualities.” This is an important distinction which I discuss at greater length elsewhere. Additionally, another building block to developing resilience, a necessary foundation for true self-esteem, is participating in team sports through adolescence. Unfortunately, girls are far more likely than boys to drop out of team sports during the formative teen years when they experience a significant drop in self-esteem.

When a well-qualified woman lacks the confidence to assert herself, to take risks professionally, or see herself as valuable, the issue comes down to a matter of ego resilience. Her ego, or inner sense of self experiences a deep fear that it is not strong enough to withstand the shame and humiliation she expects if her contribution fails to measure up. This deep fear is a key factor in limiting women’s ability to risk criticism or failure and is an aspect of risk taking behavior which it would seem, differs for men. Because, as Dweck points out, women experience criticism of their ideas, mistakes, and failure as “a reflection of their deeper qualities,” we can assume that many women feel personally attacked when their ideas are being criticized. It is extremely challenging to weather brutal criticism when one feels it directed against one’s vulnerable, innermost sense of self. Is this a phenomenon of elementary school conditioning or could there be an innate difference between men and women in the psychic structure of the ego? If there are innate differences, might this difference allow men to weather criticism more resiliently?

These are the questions that fuel my next article “The Confidence Gap” in Women: A Depth Psychology Perspective discussing the essential role of the positive animus in helping women to strengthen authentic inner self-confidence. Look for related articles to be posted soon exploring strategies for developing effective leadership skills in women as well as an exploration of the role of animus dream imagery in combatting over-identification with the Sacrificing Nurturer.

Share this: