Research Article: 2023 Vol: 26 Issue: 1
Alemtsehay Moges, Wachemo University
Biruk Hundito, Wachemo University
Citation Information: Moges, A., & Hundito, B. (2023). Women’s participation in leadership and decision making positions: in the case of some selected woreda sport offices in hadiya zone, ethiopia. Journal of Management Information and Decision Sciences, 26(1), 1-10.
Even though women have equal ability to perform in different aspects of organizational tasks as that of men, they were underrepresented in different leadership and decision making positions. So, the purpose of this study was to investigate women’s participation and barriers in leadership and decision making positions in Hadiya zone sport offices, SNNPR, Ethiopia. The study used one stage cluster sampling technique that means the researcher used simple random sampling to select woreda sport offices and collected data from all employees in the selected sport offices. Likert scale questionnaires, interview and document analysis were used as data collection instruments. The quantitative data collected by the researcher was analysed using IBM SPSS (software package for social science) version 26. The data were analysed by descriptive statistics using the mean values of likert items. In addition inferential statistics using for mean, standard division, ANOVA and bivariate Pearson’s correlation were used to analyse likert items at significance level of 0.05. The finding of the study indicated that there was less participation of women in leadership and decision making positions when compared to men. The organizational factors hindered proportion of participation with correlation coefficient and the p-value of -0.588 and 0.000 respectively. Similarly sociocultural factors had influenced participation with correlation coefficient of -0.343 and the p-value 0.007. But personal factors were positively related even though it was negligible and insignificant as correlation of 0.193 and p- value of 0.140 indicted. The interpretation of interview also indicated that organizational, sociocultural and personal factors were influencing participation of women in leadership positions. Therefore, the organization should work in minimizing the mentioned factors.
Leadership, Decision Making, Participation, Organizational Factor, Sociocultural Factor, Personal Factor.
Even though different international declarations and national policies have included issues for equality of women, in most countries women were underrepresented in different aspects and they faced different challenges which need equality and equity. According to the World Bank, in practice women were generally underrepresented in the labour force, they were paid less than men, in most cases for equal work even in differentiated areas of employment referred to as feminine (Bradlow, 1996).
Leadership and decision making positions were one of the most challenging place where females were underrepresented. The challenges faced by the women in these areas vary, but all over the world, women constitute a disadvantaged class.
All in all the fact of being a woman places oneself in an inconvenience situation that deprives her from accessing leadership positions. Secondly, lack of meaningful supportive system in the work place, from family and subordinates are categorized as significant hindrance for women leaders as well as potential leader women.
By large, barriers on women in leadership positions were categorized as; Societal, Organizational as well as Individual ones. Some take the position that the glass ceiling had inclination more too societal hindrance. Organizational obstacles were in relation to the discriminatory actions of selecting, hiring and promoting taken against women and it create interwoven situation that made conditions difficult for women to step up to the ladder of leadership positions (Elmuti et al., 2009).
Sport organizations were also another profession or aspect where women’s participation or access was minimized and women became victim in different conditions. As its history indicates, in ancient Olympics and at beginning of modern Olympic Games, women had no access to participate in sporting events as an athlete or expert; in ancient Olympic Games even they were penalized with death if they unknowingly attended the ceremonies (Henry & White, 2004).
Since the first decades of twentieth century, women’s participation in sports has been increased gradually, following start of modern Olympic Games. But the access of employment and taking leadership and decision making positions is still minimal (Henry & White, 2004).
Recent statistics show that there are very few women in leadership positions in the Olympic and Paralympic Committees, in European and national sport governing bodies, and in national sport federations. This underrepresentation of women in leadership positions in sport can be explained by prevailing masculinised sport settings, stereotypical gender roles, but also by gender blind or biased institutional norms and procedures. Many executive members are elected by their peers, who often tend to elect new leaders that feature similar characteristics as themselves (Burton, 2015).
In order to ensure a more balanced representation of women and men in leadership positions in sport, several institutions were issuing policy recommendations, establishing targets, or implementing initiatives. A number of examples are described below.
The Council of Europe is inviting the governments of the Member States to develop policies and programmes to achieve a gender-balanced representation in public authorities and public bodies related to sport. The Member States are also encouraged to integrate a gender perspective in all areas of decision making. A similar recommendation was made by the Council of the European Union (Lewis, 2014).
Women constitute half of humanity rather than being a small minority as a group. Other than incorporating the views, perspectives, and needs of women in the political aspect of the country, it is so difficult to think and speak about democracy, good governance, and development. But, circumstances portray that half of the members of the community have been ignored and could not be treated equitably and fairly. In this regard, one can ask the societies’ perception and understanding of the essence of democracy, good governance, and democracy (Dessie, 2021).
To investigate the problems of women’s participation in leadership and decision making positions in some selected woreda sport organizations in Hadiya Zone.
Research design is a guide explaining how the study will be carried out Orodho (2004); Patton (2008) summarizes the essential of research design as an activity and a time based plan, always based on the research question, guides the selection of sources and types of information, framework for specifying the relationship among the study variables and outlines the procedures for every research.
Descriptive research design was used to conduct this research. The type of descriptive what the researcher was used is survey methods. A survey is a research method used for collecting data from a predefined group of respondents to gain information and insights into various topics of interest. The process involves asking people for information through a likert type questionnaire. Surveys can help gauge the representativeness of individual views and experiences. When done well, surveys provide hard numbers on people’s opinions and behaviours that can be used to make important decisions. Primary data was collected by questionnaires. The target population of this study was the employees in Hadiya zone sport offices.
The researcher used one stage cluster sampling technique. That is to mean the researcher used simple random sampling to select seven woredas among the 16 woredas in the zone and all employees in the selected woredas were used to collect data. The total numbers of the sample are 60 from 7 woredas. For the analysis and interpretation of data the researcher used descriptive and inferential statistics. Data from the questionnaires was coded and entered in the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 26 computer software for windows program to enable analysis. Demographic variables was analysed in the forms of frequencies, percentages and pie charts. Major variables were analysed by using descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation and inferential statistics Pearson’s correlation at 0.05 significance level.
On the above table 1 the results of mean and standard deviation for the question “Women are equally promoted to senior positions” (mean=1.43 and SD=0.621) indicates that the average response fall under “strongly disagree” deviating up to “disagree” range. So this result indicates as women were not equally promoted senior leadership positions. For the question “participated in formulating and planning policies” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=1.43 and SD=0.563) indicated that the average response fall under “strongly disagree” deviating up to “disagree” range. So this result indicates that women were not participated in formulating and planning policies.
| Table 1 Descriptive Statistics Of Mean Participation Of Women In Leadership Positions |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Descriptive Statistics | |||
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | |
| Women are equally promoted to senior positions | 60 | 1.43 | 0.621 |
| Participated in formulating and planning policies | 60 | 1.43 | 0.563 |
| Equally represented in political positions | 60 | 1.43 | 0.563 |
| Women are equally delegated in different positions | 60 | 1.47 | 0.623 |
| Women have equal share leadership positions | 60 | 1.50 | 0.676 |
| Women are equal Participated in decision making | 60 | 1.50 | 0.676 |
| Equally participated finance and resource allocation | 60 | 1.57 | 0.810 |
| Average | 60 | 1.4762 | 0.62390 |
For the question “equally represented in political positions” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=1.43 and SD=0.563) indicated that the average response fall under “strongly disagree” deviating up to “disagree” range. So this result indicates that women were not equally represented in political positions. And “women are equally delegated in different positions” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=1.47 and SD=0.623) indicated that the average response fall under “strongly disagree” deviating up to “disagree” range. So this result indicates that women were not equally delegated in different leadership positions with in the sport offices.
The results of mean and standard deviation for the question women have equal share leadership positions (mean=1.50 and SD=0.626) indicates that the average response fall under “strongly disagree” deviating up to “disagree” range. So this result indicates as women have no equal share in leadership with in the sport offices and “women are equal Participated in decision making” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=1.50 and SD=0.626) indicated that the average response fall under “strongly disagree” deviating up to “disagree” range. So this result indicates that women were not equally participated in decision making positions.
Similarly for the question “equally participated finance and resource allocation” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=1.57 and SD=0.810) indicated that the average response fall under “strongly disagree” deviating up to “disagree” range. So this result indicates that women were not equally represented in political positions. In general the results of mean and standard deviation for the average participation indicated that women were not equally participated in leadership and decision making positions in the sport offices (mean=1.4762 and SD=0.62390).
From the above table 2 the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.18 and SD=1.172) for the question “women lack of acceptance by the society” which fallen under “disagree” range and deviates to upper limit of neutral range mostly indicated that women did not lack acceptance by the society but the large deviance indicates as there were lack societal acceptance to some extent and “women lack social networks” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.20 and SD=1.205) which fallen under “disagree” range and deviates to upper limit of neutral range mostly indicated that women did not lack social networks but the large deviance indicates as there were tendency to lack social acceptance.
| Table 2 Descriptive Statistics Of Mean Sociocultural Factors |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Descriptive Statistics | |||
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | |
| Women lack of acceptance by the society | 60 | 2.18 | 1.172 |
| Women lack social networks | 60 | 2.20 | 1.205 |
| Lack of cooperation of the society to women leaders | 60 | 2.43 | 1.320 |
| Societal belief of women lack decision making capacity | 60 | 2.47 | 1.186 |
| Society expects women for subordinate status | 60 | 2.58 | 1.331 |
| Society relates women with family responsibility | 60 | 2.77 | 1.442 |
| Society relates leadership with masculine | 60 | 2.78 | 1.329 |
| Societal believe of women having poor leadership skill | 60 | 2.88 | 1.180 |
| Average | 60 | 2.5375 | 0.87312 |
For the question “Lack of cooperation of the society to women leaders” the mean value of (mean=2.43) which fallen under “disagree” range mostly indicated that women leaders did not lack cooperation of society but the large standard deviation (SD=1.320) indicates as there were some respondents who agreed for this question which shows tendency for the lack of cooperation and “societal belief of women lack decision making capacity” the results of mean (2.47) which fallen under “disagree” range mostly indicated that society did not believe as women lack decision making capacity but the large standard deviation (SD) indicates as there were societal belief of women lack of decision making capacity (Kearney, 2000).
The results of mean standard deviation (mean=2.58 and SD=1.331) for the question “society expects women for subordinate status” which fall in the upper limit of “disagree” mostly indicated as society was not expecting women for subordinate but the large deviance that extends to agree indicated as society expects women for subordinate status to some extent.
For the question “society relates women with family responsibility” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.77 and SD=1.442) indicated that most of the respondents were in “neutral range” but the response deviates to agree and strongly disagree ranges.
In the same way for the question “Society relates leadership with masculine” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.78 and SD=1.329) indicated that most of the respondents were in “neutral range” but the response deviates to agree and strongly disagree ranges. Similarly for the question “Societal believe of women having poor leadership skill” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.88 and SD=1.180) indicated that most of the respondents were in “neutral range” but the response deviates to agree and strongly disagree ranges.
In general the average results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.5375 and SD=0.87312) of which fall in upper limit of disagree indicated participation of women in leadership position was less affected by sociocultural factors.
From the above table 3 the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.18 and SD=0.911) for the question “lack of extra-institutional networks for women” which fall in “agree” range indicated as there were lack of extra-institutional networks for women and “lack of adequate leave packages like family leave, sick leave, parental leave. etc.” The results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.22 and SD=1.043) which falls in agree range indicated as there was lack of adequate parental leave for women.
| Table 3 Descriptive Statistics Of Mean Organizational Factors |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| Descriptive Statistics | |||
| N | Mean | Std. Deviation | |
| Lack of extra-institutional networks for women | 60 | 4.18 | 0.911 |
| Lack of adequate leave packages ( family leave, sick leave, parental leave. etc) | 60 | 4.22 | 1.043 |
| Poor monitoring system to include women in leadership | 60 | 4.27 | 0.936 |
| Lack of training opportunities | 60 | 4.27 | 0.800 |
| Unsupportive working system | 60 | 4.32 | 0.725 |
| Less budget and resources for women empowerment | 60 | 4.33 | 0.914 |
| Improper implementation of women policy for leadership | 60 | 4.43 | 0.673 |
| Absence of clear promotion criteria | 60 | 4.50 | 0.725 |
| Average | 60 | 4.3146 | 0.69100 |
For the question “poor monitoring system to include women in leadership” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.27 and SD=0.936) which falls in “strongly agree” range indicated as there was poor monitoring system to include women in leadership position.
The results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.27 and SD=0.800) for the question “lack of training opportunities” which fall in “strongly agree” range indicated as there were lack of training opportunities for women.
Similarly the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.32 and SD=0.725) for the question “Unsupportive working system” which fall in “strongly agree” range indicated as there were unsupportive working system for women.
Also the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.33 and SD=0.914) for the question “less budget and resources for women empowerment” indicated less budget and resources allocation for women empowerment was another factor affecting women’s participation. “improper implementation of women policy for leadership” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.43 and SD=0.673) which fall in “strongly agree” range also indicated as there were improper implementation of women policy for leadership.
The results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.50 and SD=0.725) for the question “Absence of clear promotion criteria” indicated absence of clear promotion criteria was the main factor hindering women from participating in leadership position.
The results of mean and standard deviation (mean=4.50 and SD=0.725) for the question “Absence of clear promotion criteria” indicated absence of clear promotion criteria was the main factor hindering women from participating in leadership position.
From the above table 4 the results of mean and standard deviation (mean1.58 and SD=0.743) for the question “low leadership skills” which fallen in strongly disagree range indicated that the women had no low leadership skills.
The results of mean and standard deviation (mean1.65 and SD=0.799) for the question “low leadership knowledge” which fallen in strongly disagree range also indicated that the women had no low leadership knowledge.
For the question “lack commitment to accept leadership” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean1.87 and SD=0.892) which fallen in disagree range indicated that the women had no lack of commitment to accept leadership.
Similarly for the question “lack of confidence” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.00and SD=0.803) which fallen in disagree range indicated that the women had no lack of confidence.
Also for the question “Lack of motivation” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.32 and SD=0.930) which fallen in disagree range indicated that the women did not lack motivation.
In addition for the question “low emotional stability” the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=2.38 and SD=0.940) which fallen in disagree range indicated that the women had no low emotional stability.
But the results of mean and standard deviation (mean=3.38 and SD=0.846) for the question “family commitments (Child care, House hold, etc.)” which fallen in the upper limit of “neutral” indicated that to some extent family commitments had affected women’s participation in leadership.
In general the mean and standard deviation (mean=2.1271 and SD=0.48027) of average personal factors which fallen in disagree range with less deviance indicated that personal factors were not affecting women’s participation in leadership and decision making positions in the sport offices.
From the above correlation table 5, the results of Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value (r=-0.588, p=0.000) of mean organizational factors indicated that there was moderate negative linear relationship and significant (p ≤ 0.05) impact of organizational factors on the mean participation of women in leadership and decision making positions. So the organizational factors were hindering women from coming to leadership positions in sport organizations.
| Table 5 Correlation Analysis In Leadership Position And Selected Variables |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Correlations | |||||
| Mean. Participation | Mean. Sociocultural | Mean. Organizational | Mean. Personal | ||
| Mean. Participation | Pearson Correlation | 1 | |||
| Sig. (2-tailed) | |||||
| N | 60 | ||||
| Mean. Sociocultural | Pearson Correlation | -0.343** | 1 | ||
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.007 | ||||
| N | 60 | 60 | |||
| Mean. Organizational | Pearson Correlation | -0.588** | -0.123 | 1 | |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.000 | 0.349 | |||
| N | 60 | 60 | 60 | ||
| Mean. Personal | Pearson Correlation | 0.193 | 0.248 | -0.243 | 1 |
| Sig. (2-tailed) | 0.140 | 0.056 | 0.061 | ||
| N | 60 | 60 | 60 | 60 | |
| **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). | |||||
Similarly the results of Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value (r=-0.343, p=0.007) of mean sociocultural factors indicated that there was low negative linear relationship and significant (p ≤ 0.05) impact of sociocultural factors on the mean participation of women in leadership and decision making positions. So the sociocultural factors were hindering women from coming to leadership positions in sport organizations.
But the results of Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value (r=0.193, p=0.140) of mean personal factors indicated that there was negligible positive linear relationship and insignificant (p ≥ 0.05) impact of personal factors on women’s participation on leadership and decision making positions in the sport offices.
The above ANOVA table 6 of regression with p-value (p ≤ 0.05) indicates that there would be significant impact of the independent variables on the dependent variables.
| Table 6 Anova Table Of Regression |
||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Sum of Squares | Df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| 1 | Regression | 12.483 | 3 | 4.161 | 22.228 | 0.000b |
| Residual | 10.483 | 56 | 0.187 | |||
| Total | 22.966 | 59 | ||||
| a. Dependent Variable: mean. Participation | ||||||
| b. Predictors: (Constant), mean. Personal, mean. Organizational, mean. Sociocultural | ||||||
The purpose of the study was to investigate women’s participation in leadership and decision making positions in Hadiya zone sport offices, SNNPR, Ethiopia. Based on the results of the study the following discussions was made in comparison to the previously report study.
• In Women’s participation Present status of women’s participation in leadership and decision making position in sport offices is in general the results above table 3 of mean and standard deviation for the average women’s participation indicated that women were not equally participated in leadership and decision making positions in the sport offices (mean=1.4762and SD=0.62390). This finding was supported by (Lapchick, Bustamante, & Ruiz, 2007)states women are underrepresented in leadership areas in professional sport and Tsegay et al. (2021) also states that status of women in national sport organization in Ethiopian national sport organization is very low.
• In Sociocultural factors the mean value of the first five questions related with sociocultural variables fall under disagree range indicating as sociocultural factors are not hindering women to come to leadership and decision making positions. While the mean values of three questions fall under the range of neutral. The average results of this study mean and standard deviation (mean=2.5375 and SD=0.87312) of which fall in upper limit of disagree indicated participation of women in leadership position was affected by sociocultural factors. This finding was supported by Mbugua (2007) the study revealed that social cultural factors influence the upward mobility of women in top leadership positions. It was further revealed that women are as capable as the men in discharging leadership responsibilities.
• In the Organizational factors the above mean values of six variables such as ‘absence of clear promotion criteria, improper implementation of women policy for leadership, less budget and resources for women empowerment, unsupportive working system, lack of training opportunities, and Poor monitoring system to include women in leadership’ fall under strongly agree range indicating that there is no supportive and objective way of coming to leadership and decision making positions. On the other hand, the mean value of two organizational factors fall under disagree range. The mean and standard deviation average result of this study shows (mean=4.3146 and SD=0.69100) which fallen in “strongly agree” range indicated that organization factors were highly affecting women’s participation in leadership and decision making positions. The above result was supported by (Mbugua, 2007). The organization culture inhibits the progression of women to top leadership positions. Organization politics are major inhibiting factors in upward mobility of women in top leadership positions.
• In Personal factors the mean value of almost all expected personal factors fall under the range of disagree and the mean value of two factors under neutral range. The average personal factors of mean and standard deviation shows (mean=2.1271 and SD=0.48027) fallen in disagree range with less deviance indicated that personal factors were not affecting women’s participation in leadership and decision making positions in the sport offices. This was indicating that women have no personal barriers or weaknesses which hinder their participation to leadership. But the mean value of ‘family commitments’ fallen at upper limit of neutral range, it might be one personal factor which is pulling them back. This result was a little bit supported by (Tsegay et al., 2021). Family responsibilities is the main challenges that affects women’s participation in national sport organization, and in sport leadership positions particularly, is taking care of the family. Women’s, as a whole, are primarily responsible for more household labour or family responsibilities, since the 1960s (Sayer, 2005). It needs further study in a larger scope. This study shows that the majorities of men’s are in the top leadership and decision making positions.
The researcher conducted to examine the participation level of women in leadership positions and decision making to identify the impact of possible sociocultural, organizational and personal factors. The findings of the study concluded that:
• In the present study women’s participation indicated that women were not equally participated in leadership and decision making positions in the sport offices
• The present study indicated that the participation of women in leadership position was less affected by sociocultural factors.
• This study shows that organizational factor is the main factor inhibits women’s progression to top leadership and decision making positions.
• Personal factors had negligible and insignificant positive correlation with the participation level of women in leadership and decision making positions.
• In general, the findings of this study indicate as there was unequal participation of woman in leadership positions in Hadiya zone sport offices. Structural and sociocultural factors were the main factors.
• This finding would have contribution in bringing fairness for woman’s related to participation in leadership and decision making positions.
Based on the above mentioned findings of the study, the following points are recommended for future enhancement of participation of women in leadership and decision making positions in Hadiya zone sport offices.
• The organization should make working environment inclusive for women by developing clear promotion criteria, implementing of women policy for leadership, allocating adequate budget and resource for women empowerment, creating supportive working system, facilitating training opportunities, etc.
• The organization and other stakeholders should create awareness in the society to avoid some misconceptions like women have poor leadership skill and they are created for family responsibilities, men are created for leadership.
• Even though personal factors had a little bit positive correlation with participation of women in leadership positions, to get better improvement the government should facilitate different educational and training opportunities for women
Bradlow, D.D. (1996). The World Bank, the IMF, and human rights.Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Probs.,6, 47.
Burton, L.J. (2015). Underrepresentation of women in sport leadership: A review of research.Sport Management Review,18(2), 155-165.
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Dessie, W.A. (2021). Women and Ethiopian politics: Political leaders’ attitude and views on women’s effectiveness.Cogent Social Sciences,7(1), 1948653.
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Elmuti, D., Jia, H., & Davis, H.H. (2009). Challenges women face in leadership positions and organizational effectiveness: An investigation.Journal of Leadership Education,8(2), 167-187.
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Henry, I., & White, A. (2004). Women, leadership and the Olympic movement. Beyond The Scoreboard, 202.
Lewis, J. (2014). The council of the european union and the european council. In Routledge Handbook of European Politics, 263-278.
Mbugua, W. (2007). An investigation of factors influencing women progression to leadership positions in Kenya.Kenyatta University.
Orodho, J.A. (2004). Techniques of writing research proposals and reports in education and social sciences.Nairobi: Masola Publishers.
Patton, M.Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation. Thousand Oaks (États-Unis): Sage Publications.
Kearney, M.L. (2000).Women, power, and the academy: from rhetoric to reality. Berghahn Books.
Tsegay, M., Legesse, K., & Ejigu, A. (2021). The practice and challenges of women’s participation in decision making in the national sports organizations of ethiopia.Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development,12(2).
Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref
Received: 24-Oct-2022, Manuscript No. JMIDS-22-12714; Editor assigned: 26-Oct-2022, Pre QC No. JMIDS-22-12714(PQ); Reviewed: 09-Nov-2022, QC No. JMIDS-22-12714; Revised: 12-Nov-2022, Manuscript No. JMIDS-22-12714(R); Published: 18-Nov-2022