By “boss” I am referring to our top leaderships posts such as President, Prime Minister and Chief Executive.
My humble opinion is founded on evidence garnered over 45 years working experience and interaction involving organizations in four regional countries and top management of US$multi billion entities in the UK, the US, Germany, Australia and New Zealand.
I have no hesitation in saying; in insisting, that “the boss” should be a woman.
To simplify something that could occupy a book, the central difference appears to be that of ego, not the brash overpowering “bully boy” insistence of being top dog, but an ever present insistence on acceptance and dominance. Howsoever subtle, this insistence is always there, as one side of coin whose other side is the acting out of manifestations of insecurity.
For starters, who are we kidding? Surely it is blindingly obvious that anything that can grow another human being in its stomach, produce it perfectly formed, and survive, is clearly biologically superior to the male species?

In my blog post I make out my case and include -
If I had my way I would ensure that on the day that the boss takes up his post, he undergoes IQ and aptitude tests in direct competition with all staff, and the results posted on the entity’s notice board. This “chastening” experience will be good for us males, in particular, and force us to accept a few things about ourselves and the people we lead.
The goal will change from “dominance” to inspiring others to lead in their functional areas.
Perhaps I am wrong. I doubt it. Just look at how buggerred up this male dominated world is.