The Capability of Women in Management Roles

After reading the two articles titled “Why we don't like women bosses (and why it matters)” (Shiao, 2016) and “Do Men Make Better Bosses Than Women? (No, and Here’s Why.)” (Wolfe, 2017), I believe that the latter should be sent out to the heads of the different departments because it focuses on the capability of women in management roles and the examples given substantiate the author’s claims very well, which increases the reliability of the article.

The article written by Lahle Wolfe is more persuasive as it focuses on the capability of women in management roles whereas the article written by Vivien Shiao focuses on the discrimination against women. With reference to a survey mentioned in the second article that was conducted by Harvard Business Review, women outscored men in leadership skills and competency at all managerial levels (Wolfe, 2017). This shows that women are better than men in management roles. By proving that women are capable as managers, the department heads would be more inclined to recruit women into senior roles as they are convinced that female managers can deliver better work performance.

In contrast, the article by Shiao is poor in persuading the department heads that more women should be recruited into management roles as it mainly details the discrimination faced by women and provides no positive traits of women as managers. For example, the article mentioned that due to insufficient female role models, women in the workforce tend to be less confident in their own abilities (Shiao, 2016, para.14). By showing that women have lower confidence in their capabilities, the article deters department heads from hiring female managers because low confidence is generally viewed as an undesirable trait in senior roles and can diminish work performance. Hence, the article by Wolfe is better than the article by Shiao in persuading the department heads as it portrays women positively in managerial positions.However, the article by Shiao may be more persuasive than the article by Wolfe because the focus on discrimination against women might appeal to the department heads’ rationality that women can be capable when given the chance.

According to the article, Shiao claims that giving support to women who aspire and attain positions of power can help women become more effective leaders and make way for other women (Shiao, 2016, para.15). This implies that women are unable to showcase their abilities as leaders due to lack of support arising from female prejudice. Thus, the focus on discrimination in Shiao’s article may cause the department heads to view women as capable leaders when given the opportunity to do so. As such, they would support the company’s recruitment efforts of women in senior roles and promote inclusiveness in the company. Hence, Shiao’s article may be more persuasive than Wolfe’s article because it can garner support for women by appealing to the department heads’ rationality that women are capable when given the chance.

Nevertheless, the article by Wolfe is more reliable and thus more persuasive than the article by Shiao because Wolfe supports her claims by corroborating her examples with other sources whereas Shiao repeatedly used the same example to support her claims. For instance, Wolfe included a snippet of an article from Forbes to validate her previous example of a survey conducted on a Gallup poll. By using corroboration, Wolfe’s examples would be more trustworthy as they are verified further by external sources. On the other hand, Shiao used the example of Hillary Clinton more than twice throughout her article and she also wrote “From what I have observed, women are harder on other women because many view the corporate world as a zero-sum game.” (Shiao, 2016, para.12). Shiao’s frequent use of an example diminishes the reliability of her article as this implies that there is insufficient evidence to back up her claims. Furthermore, she did not support her observation with evidence, which reduces the reliability of her claim that women do not support one another. Hence, Wolfe’s article would be more persuasive than Shiao’s article as it is more reliable due to sufficient substantiation of claims.

Overall, after analysing both articles, I feel that the article written by Lahle Wolfe should be sent out to the heads of departments in the company because the article is more persuasive in promoting women’s capabilities in senior roles and it also has substantial evidence to prove that women are capable. While the article written by Vivien Shiao may be more persuasive in promoting inclusiveness in a company, the lack of evidences reduces its reliability. This may offset or even worsen its persuasiveness because the department heads would be sceptical while reading the article. Therefore, the better article would be the one written by Wolfe as it is both reliable and persuasive, thus leaving a deeper impression on the department heads.