Leadership: A Crucial Ingredient in Unstable Times

Social work is experiencing an unprecedented degree of institutional instability, particularly in the advanced industrial nations which, to varying degrees and via differing paths, have abandoned the Keynesian Welfare State. It has been replaced with a fundamentally different workfare regime in which operates on quite different assumptions – all of which pose fundamental challenges to social work. The degree of change is such that it can be understood as institutional change. The profession needs a number of strategies in response the contemporary de-stabilization. Drawing on theoretical and empirical literature about institutional change we show why it is that professional leadership is crucial in the current environment. The paper reviews what in currently know about leadership, both in general and in relation to social work. Referring to the notion of institutional entrepreneurs and on the role played by other non-social work professional associations in situations of change, we articulate what role leadership can play. We conclude with recommendations about how leadership could be promoted, particularly by the professional associations.

Gender-fair language in the context of leadership: Preventing the lack of fit for women

Women are still underrepresented in leadership due to a perceived a ‘lack of fit’. Thus, women are hired less likely, evaluated unfavorably or are less willing to take over a leadership role than their male counterparts. Because gender-fair language (e.g., feminine-masculine word pairs, German: ‘Geschäftsführerin/Geschäftsführer’, CEO, fem./CEO, masc.) leads to a higher mental inclusion of women compared to generic masculine forms (German: ‘Geschäftsführer’, CEO,masc.), we argue that masculine forms endorse the ‘lack of fit’ for women in leadership, whereas gender-fair language reduces it. Three studies support our assumption. Masculine forms led to a ‘lack of fit’ for women in leader selection: they were hired less likely (Study 1) and evaluated less favorably (Study 2) than their male counterparts. Moreover, women showed less willingness to apply when masculine forms were used in the advertisement for a leadership position. Contrary, no such gender-bias was obtained in case of gender-fair language.