Chapter 2: Female Leadership for Peace and Human Security: Case Study of Israel/Palestine

Peace and human security are increasingly urgent global concerns. Yet traditionally, leaders have tended to avoid tangible actions toward peace unless it aligns with strategic interests. As conflict in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) continues, the need to understand the dynamics and leadership in the region becomes imperative. War, security, and conflict are gendered issues; the political sphere is male dominated, with women leading communities rather than countries (Cockburn, 2013).

A meta-analysis of more than 160 studies found “feminine” leadership styles tended to be more democratic, participatory, cooperative, and relational, whereas “masculine” leadership styles were characterized as more directive, autocratic, and task-oriented (Eagly & Johnson, 1990). Eagly, Makhijani, and Klonsky (1992) conducted a meta-analysis, which found that women and men were both evaluated favorably when using a feminine style of leadership. A more recent study discovered similar findings as well (Gerzema & D’Antonio, 2013). However, women were viewed as ineffective when using a masculine style of leadership (Gaines, 2007). Further, leadership tends to be associated with masculinity, and this preference, along with stereotypes of female leaders, make women seem less natural in leadership roles (Koenig, Eagly, Mitchell, & Ristikari, 2011). Women face challenges to their leadership as well as leadership advancement if those who make decisions on selecting and advancing leaders ascribe to the belief that females in leadership roles—due to contextual and gender-based stereotypes— are less effective than male leaders (Vinkenburg, van Engen, Eagly, & Johannesen-Schmidt, 2011). This raises questions beyond leadership styles and points to the need to examine culture and context, as society and environment undoubtedly affect the perceptions of leaders.