• Macro – An initial doubt was based on the changing political climate. Democratization creates societies that are more open to diversity, more transparent and less corrupt. These democratic values also penetrate organizations, which means that they also welcome more diversity. 
  As a result the relation between women and corruption is an indirect one via the democratization of institutions. (Sung, 2012; Esarey & Chirillo, 2012; Kolstad & Wiig, 2011; Jianakoplos & Bernasek, 1998; Schulze and Frank, 2003)
  It is “the fairer system” and not “the fairer sex” that explains the decrease of corruption.

• Meso or organsiational level - A first explanation at the organizational level is based on the fact that women have difficulties in breaking through the glass ceiling in order to take leading positions in the organization. Corruption has been described as a crime that mostly starts at the top of the organizations. (Goetze, 2003; Appelbaum, Audet & Miller, 2003)
  Possibly that explains why women don’t commit corruption: they don’t have the chance.
  
  Secondly corruption is a crime that only succeeds with the support of a powerful network. This is certainly a fact for the large corruption cases. The few women that succeed in reaching the top of the organization are excluded from participation in the male networks. (Goetze, 2003)

• Micro - A last explanation that undermines the hypothesis of women as the fairer sex has been identified at the micro level or individual level. 
  A first hypothesis is the low detection rate. Corruption is a crime that is hard to detect for the police and the judicial system. This is certainly the case for the smaller corruption cases at the lower level of the organization. Due to their non-leading positions in the organization women get involved in smaller crimes at the lower levels. Women commit corruption at the lower level of the organization by making usage of the limited opportunities they have. The statistics on Pink Collar Criminals are alarming. According to the FBI, male embezzlers have increased only 4% since 1990 while Pink Collar crime has increased over 40% during that time period. Hence, this creates a misconception that women are less corrupt.(Branisa & Ziegler , 2010)
  
  Another related hypothesis is that the same kind of crime, when committed by a woman, is punished harder. (Dodge, 2007) That frightens women and restrains them from committing crime.

• It is widely accepted by researchers that there is a kind of relation between the lower level of corruption and more women working in the organization
  
• However there is less consensus about the reason why this is the case. Suggestions are the socialization, the lack of opportunities and the fear for harsher punishments. 
  

• Prioritizes the collective before the interests of the individual
  
• Leads to transparency
  
• Facilitates a two way communication, that respects the rights and needs of the subordinates 
  
• Checks continuously if actions are ethical. 
  

• Four experts in investigating corruption cases: two private investigators, a police investigator, a magistrate. 
  
• Four experts in female leadership: two female academics working on gender issues, a human resources manager and one consultant in leadership. 
  
• Four leaders: a male and a female public sector manager and a male and a female private sector manager. 
  

1. “Do you see a relationship between leadership and corruption?”
   Most respondents agreed that corruption occurs mainly at the level of middle management and top management in an organization. They explained it by referring to the networks of silence that protect leading managers, the success oriented culture at the top, the lack of fear of sanctions, the lack of social control, the bonus culture … . One corruption expert summarized these ideas by saying: “Corruption is not a gender problem but a power problem”.
   
   
2. “Are women inclined to be involved in corruption?”
   None of the respondents working in a leadership position or in investigating corruption were familiar with cases of corruption committed by women. Some of them explained this by the absence of the opportunity: only a few women succeed in breaking through the glass ceiling. Most of the respondents related this lack of corruption to the female characteristics that are expected from women. Softness, respectfulness and altruism were characteristics named by the respondents. 
   A last reflection on the low percentage of women involved in corruption corresponds to the above mentioned hypothesis of ‘pink collar crime’. Because of their inferior social position women do commit corruption themselves, but in a roundabout way, in using the opportunities they have. One given example of pink collar crime was that women (be they a secretary, wife or concubine) influence male leaders to make corrupt decisions. 
   
   
3. “Are female executives more ethical than male leaders?” 
   Around the connection between corruption and female leadership and whether women have a more ethical leadership style we can split the answers in two different categories: 

a.    Some respondents confirmed that they perceive women in top functions as having a more ethical style.

They explained that since climbing to the top was very difficult, women fear to lose their position again. This fear has an impact on their way of leading. 
Another reason is the often vulnerable position at the top. They are permanently observed by their direct colleagues and also by the media. By applying the ethical leadership style they can probably become more socially accepted. 
In short, the harder condemnation for female executives and the greater the fear of losing their position, the more likely it is that women will refrain from corruption.

b.    The others explained that this ethical female attitude can quickly turn into a masculine attitude once they reach  a top function. 

The second category of respondents thought that women are more ethical until they reach the top of the organization. Functioning in senior positions is a “tough world”. These respondents explained that female executives are afraid of being considered too soft by their colleagues. To survive in that male-dominated culture they conscientiously choose a masculine leadership style. 

Conclusion

The question if female leadership can reduce corruption should be answered carefully. The respondents all thought that women are more ethical than men as long as we speak about the lower levels of the organization. There was less consensus about the fairer sex at the top of the organization. 

First it is certainly not a fact that female leaders don’t commit corruption. Imelda Marcos, Winnie Mandela and Edith Cresson are only some famous examples of women in leadership positions who committed grand corruption. Based on the large literature review and the perception study we can say that the education of women and the way they are socialized in society can have a positive effect on the ethical attitude of women and indirectly also on their ethical leadership style. However people‘s attitude is determined by more than their gender. 

Second there are a lot of examples of men in executive positions who use an ethical or female leadership style and succeeded in making their organization more ethical. That leads us to the conclusion that it is the feminine values (honesty, carefulness, transparency, …) of leadership, rather than the actual gender, that contributes to an ethical organization.

For future research we suggest further exploration of which kind of mechanisms make a leader take a more masculine (risky, dominant, non-participative, …), or a more feminine leadership style. Is it the personaI socialization trajectory? Or is it the business culture of the organization? And does gender equality at the executive level play a role in that? This can help to understand how leadership styles have an impact on the efficient prevention of corruption and also on financial crises.