One by one, the glittering prizes are falling to women. General Motors, IBM, PepsiCo, Lockheed Martin and DuPont are among a couple of dozen giant American companies with female bosses. Oxford University is about to follow the1of Harvard and 2its first female leader. Women still have a/an3way to go: the New York Times points out that more big American firms are run by men called John than by women. But the4is clear: women now make up more than 50% of university graduates and of new5by big employers. 　　Will this growing cadre of female bosses6any differently from men? Forty years ago feminists would have found the very question7. Pioneers such as Margaret Thatcher argued that women could and would do the same job as men, if8a chance. But today some management scholars argue that women9the leadership qualities most valued in modern firms. 　　Those who say women are better suited to taking charge of today’s companies also10two other arguments. The first is that women are better at “androgynous” management--that is,11supposedly “male” and “female” characteristics into a powerful mixture. This is particularly12in business13great changes, which need a combination of command-and-control and caring-and-sharing. The second is that women differ from men not so much in their leadership style14in the values that they bring to the job. They are much more influenced by15and fairness than men. 　　That leads to the second consideration: That both male and female managers are perfectly16adapting their leadership styles to17changing circumstances. Male managers are18embracing a collaborative approach to leadership, as they adapt to a society that has become less deferential. In a 2016 study of 917 managers in Norway--a country that has led the way in female-friendly policies, from board19to public child care--Ann Grethe Solberb, a sociologist, concluded that: “Men and women don’t have different20of leadership.”