In a time of uncertainty and tension, a leadership for norms and values about equality and value-based leadership seems more important than ever. At the same time, fear and various expressions of resistance seem to hinder leadership for everyone's equal value.

The purpose is to examine principals' narratives about their leadership for gender equality, especially with regards to emotions and resistance, which seems to play a big role. What kind of leadership is needed to support willingness to learn and develop active norms that support values about equality?

Schools are here seen as organizations, especially connected to the “doing gender-perspective” with its first references to West and Zimmerman (1987). It includes an understanding that gender is created and meaning of gender is formed in different relational activities in an organization.

Previous studies have problematized how gender equality should be understood and what it "is" (Magnusson et al. 2008). Resistance in organizations to gender equality work is common, and expressions of resistance are numerous, as shown by various research studies. However, there is a lack of knowledge about different expressions of resistance in schools from a principal's perspective in the role of responsibility. From one perspective, gender equality work is in many ways similar to any change initiative, as changes within organizations often create tensions and expose power dynamics within them. Change can be perceived as encountering unwillingness, resistance to change, and difficulties in altering established routines and work methods. However, many researchers have argued that gender equality work is a particularly complex development effort that involves conflicts, dilemmas, and various difficulties requiring attention to power, interests, and spaces for action (Cockburn 1991, Pincus 1997, Wahl m.fl. 2011, Linghag et al 2016, Amundsdotter et al 2016,).

Several studies stresses the importance of active support from managers and leadership for increased gender equality is emphasized (Acker 2000, Pincus 1997).

Joan Ackers (1992) model for processes where gender plays a role and is integrated in other organizational processes, has served as an important contribution to different research and development projects, that aim to work with understanding how gender is affecting people in an organization and how one can work with change processes. The model points out how gender is intertwined with other processes in divisions, symbols, interaction and internal identity work (ibid).

Interactive processes have been carried out with 120 principals each session, attending the National School Leadership Training Program in Sweden. These processes involve individual writings, reflective writing on how gender is addressed in one's own leadership context, individual reflections combined with written group work, organized according to different school forms.

Some results from the joint work in the prinicpals groups shows that leadership weaknesses and challenges can be multifaceted and involve both a lack of knowledge and awareness. A clear difficulty is their own resistance, where leaders can stand in the way of change due to personal obstacles. It could be fear of pursuing equality issues, a lack of systematic work or difficulties in asking the right questions and problematizing. Understanding and leading an almost single-sex group can also be a challenge, including dealing with any power relations going on in the group. Several women testify to the devaluation of "feminine" characteristics and the use of stereotypical images. A specific challenge is the image of "good girl", which can lead to self-pressure and pressure on other women in the organization. Examples are given where women invest more time and work in administrative systems compared to male colleagues. Men in female-dominated environments reflect on their privileges, where they may perceive that they do not have to contribute as much and do not have to prepare in the same way as female colleagues. Their competence and value are more easily confirmed in interactions. Fear is a common denominator, both fear of threats and aggression from educators as well as from parents. Female leaders may also experience difficulties in being accepted as women and principals, especially in meetings with male parents.

Acker, J (1992). Gendering Organizational Theory, In Mills, Albert & Tancred Peta (Eds.). Gendering Organizational Analysis. London: Sage Publications. Acker, J. (2000) Gendered Contradictions in Organizational Equity Projects. Organization, 7(4):625-32. Amundsdotter, E. (2009). Att framkalla och förändra ordningen – aktionsorienterad genusforskning för jämställda organisationer. [To develop and alter the order – action-orientated gender research for gender equal organizations] Diss. Luleå: Luleå tekniska universitet Andersson, S. & Amundsdotter, E. (2012). Developing Innovative Organisations using Action-oriented Gender Research. In Andersson, S., Berglund, K., Gunnarsson, E. & Sundin, E. (Eds) (2012). Promoting innovations. Policies, Practices and Procedures. Stockholm: VINNOVA. Gherardi, Silvia (1994). The Gender We Think, The Gender We Do in Our Everyday Organizational Lives. Human Relations. Vol. 47 Issue 6:591-610. Magnusson, E, Rönnblom, M & Silius, H (red.) (2008). Critical studies of gender equalities: Nordic dislocations, dilemmas and contradictions. Göteborg: Makadam. Martin, P. Y. (2003). “Said and Done” Versus “Saying and Doing”, Gendering Practices, Practicing Gender. Gender & Society. 17:342-366 West, C, & Zimmerman, D. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society 1, pp: 125-51. West, C, & Zimmerman, D. (2009). Accounting for doing gender. Gender & Society. Vol, 23, No. 1. pp. 111-122