Imagine a balancing weighing scale with a red Salvation Army shield in the middle. One side of the scale is marked “women” while the other side is marked “men.” The goal is for the scale to be balanced. To achieve this, both women and men need to be equitably equipped for mission, recognized for their giftings, and feel seen and heard by their peers and around decision-making tables.

Then, consider adding organizational opportunities to each of the plates; things such as access to leadership development, invitations to senior leadership positions, important conversations and appointed responsibilities. Each are represented by a weight added to either the side marked “women” or “men.”

Over the years, this scale has repeatedly tipped in favour of men. Men have historically been privy to greater opportunities for education, leadership experience, participation on committees and boards, and respect on the front lines. This is thanks in large part to the existence of societal norms in which men hold greater power and privilege relative to women. It’s a reality identified by the Canadian government as part of their Anti-Racism Strategy’s exploration of power and privilege (check out the Wheel of Privilege and Power to see where you place on the wheel). This is often exacerbated in Christian circles by influences from other Christian denominations that emphasize male headship rather than aligning with The Salvation Army’s egalitarian reading of Scripture (read our Gender Equity blog on the topic).

Wrestling with Bias

Despite The Salvation Army’s theological belief that women and men are called to serve at all levels in the organization, this has not historically been the lived experience of women. As of this year, only 16% of territorial commanders were women. And while this statistic speaks only of positional leadership at the highest level, the report prepared and presented by The Salvation Army Canada and Bermuda Territory’s Gender Equity Task Force in 2022 suggested that male officers have been supported above women officers far too often.

We call this favouring of one group over another “bias.” This is a conscious or unconscious prejudice or stereotype that results in a preference or tendency towards a person, group or idea—in this case, an often-unconscious bias towards men, perpetuated by the society in which our organization operates.

While the bias may be unconscious, the result is a hesitancy for women to step forward for leadership opportunities. In the first open call for area commander candidates, only four of the 20 self-identified applicants were women. Furthermore, anecdotal evidence reveals that women officers in our organization are more likely to turn down invitations to higher-level leadership positions than their male colleagues.

Levelling the Playing Field

So, how do we balance the scales?

The Gender Equity Task Force report recommended that a “temporary positive bias towards officer development should be given to female officers, as they will need greater immediate supports if they are to succeed.”

For a limited period of time, proverbial weights need to be added to the “women” side of the scale at a more significant rate than they are added to plate marked “men.” This can take the form of leadership development opportunities designed for women, increased invitations for women to participate in pre-existing development programs or through intentionally providing coaches and mentors for women officers. We see this already happening, with invitations for women to attend the International College for Officers (ICO) and other continuing education opportunities, and women who have recently taken on high-level leadership positions in our territory.  Ensuring our committees and boards—from local corps mission boards and advisory councils all the way to our most senior committees—have equitable gender representation will also make sure women’s voices and skills are heard and valued.

With time, investing in women in these ways will see the scales reach equilibrium, with women and men both being equally valued and utilized for Kingdom work. Until then, a temporary positive bias is needed to level the playing field. This is vital if we are to truly live out our egalitarian theological roots and maximize mission impact in the communities of our world.