Methodologies of Resistance: Centring Marginalised Voices Within Mainstream Leadership Research.

Leadership is complex and often contextual in nature. Attempts to understand diversity in leadership scholarship, specifically aspects of gender and leadership, have focused on gender as a variable rather than as a multifaceted construct. Traditional research methodologies have placed quantitative methodologies on a pedestal for some time with the trend to stick with indicators that are easily quantifiable (Beetham & Demetriades, 2007; Molina-Azorin, 2018). While quantitative indicators can be useful in recording numbers of women who participate in government offices, for example, they do not tell us about the quality of their participation, their contributions to further gender equity, or the nuances of their marginalized experiences. Quantitative methods have their place and are needed to gather a full picture to measure gender inequality, however, assessing leadership solely through quantitative means is not enough (Molina-Azorin, 2018; Tan, 2012). Diverse data is required to truly represent the role of gender in lived experiences (Beetham & Demetriades, 2007) to get in-depth understanding. This chapter will explore the use of methodologies to center the voices of those who are marginalized and to amplify feminist praxis. To truly understand the complexity of gender and leadership, we must approach our research using an intersectional lens and critical perspectives that questionss who benefits and who is disadvantaged in society through non-traditional and feminist methodologies (see Chapter 2).