This study examined how external evaluators' assessments of a management team and its leader are impacted by congruence between the leader's gender and the gender typing of the industry in which the team works. We experimentally tested our theory using industries that are either male typed or gender neutral, with teams led by male and female leaders. Results indicate that performance expectations for the team were more favorable when the leader's gender was congruent with the industry's gender typing, but expectations for the leader were not affected by gender congruence. These findings paradoxically suggest that evaluators form performance expectations for teams based upon individual characteristics of their leaders, even when these characteristics have no effect on the conscious assessments of the leaders themselves.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BemS. L. (1974). The measurement of psychological androgyny.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 155–162.
2.
BemS. L. (1981). Bem Sex Role Inventory: Professional manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
3.
BertrandM.MullainathanS. (2004). Are Emily and Greg more employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A field experiment on labor market discrimination.American Economic Review, 94, 991–1013.
4.
BrennerO. C.TomkiewiczJ.ScheinV. E. (1989). The relationship between sex-role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics revisited.Academy of Management Journal, 32, 662–669.
5.
BrushC. G.CarterN.GatewoodE.GreeneP.HartM. (2004). Gatekeepers of venture growth: A Diana Project report on the role and participation of women in the venture capital industry. Kansas City, MO: Ewing Marion Kaufmann Foundation.
6.
ButterfieldD. A.GrinnellJ. P. (1999). “Re-viewing” gender, leadership, and managerial behavior. Do three decades of research tell us anything? In PowellG. N. (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work (pp. 223–238). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
CarliL. L.EaglyA. H. (1999). Gender effects on social influence and emergent leadership. In PowellG. N. (Ed.), Handbook of gender and work (pp. 203–222). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8.
Catalyst (2006). 2005 Catalyst census of women corporate officers and top earners of the Fortune 500. New York: Catalyst.
9.
CejkaM. A.EaglyA. H. (1999). Gender-stereotypic images of occupations correspond to the sex segregation of employment.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 413–423.
10.
CommissionTUSEEO. (2003). Occupational employment in private industry by race/ethnic group/sex and by industry, United States, 2003. Retrieved Aug. 26, 2006, from http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/jobpat/2003/national.html.
11.
CommissionTUSEEO. (2006). Occupational employment in private industry by race/ethnic group/sex and by industry, United States, 2006. Retrieved Dec. 12, 2008, from http://www.eeoc.gov/stats/jobpat/2006/nac5/index.html.
12.
DaviesG.MianT. (2006). The reputation of the leader and that of the organization: Evidence from the business of politics. Atlanta, GA: Academy of Management Proceedings.
13.
DavisonH. K.BurkeM. J. (2000). Sex discrimination in simulated employment contexts: A meta-analytic investigation.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 225–248.
14.
EaglyA. H. (1987). Sex differences in social behavior: A social-role interpretation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15.
EaglyA. H.KarauS. J. (2002). Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders.Psychological Review, 109, 573–598.
16.
EaglyA. H.KarauS. J.MakhijaniM. G. (1995). Gender and the effectiveness of leaders—A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 117, 125–145.
17.
EaglyA. H.MakhijaniM. G.KlonskyB. G. (1992). Gender and the evaluation of leaders—A meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin, 111, 3–22.
18.
EaglyA. H.SteffenV. J. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735–754.
19.
FlynnF. J.StawB. M. (2004). Lend me your wallets: The effect of charismatic leadership on external support for an organization.Strategic Management Journal, 25, 309–330.
20.
Garcia-RetameroR.Lopez-ZafraE. (2006). Prejudice against women in male-congenial environments: Perceptions of gender role congruity in leadership.Sex Roles, 55, 51–61.
21.
GraffinS. D.WadeJ. B.PoracJ. F.McNameeR.C. (2008). The impact of CEO status diffusion on the economic outcomes of other senior managers.Organization Science, 19, 457–474.
22.
HambrickD. C.MasonP. A. (1984). Upper echelons—The organization as a reflection of its top managers.Academy of Management Review, 9, 193–206.
23.
HeilmanM. E. (1983). Sex bias in work settings: The lack of fit model. In CummingsL.StawB. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 5, pp. 269–298). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
24.
HeilmanM. E. (1995). Sex stereotypes and their effects in the workplace: What we know and what we don't know.Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10(6), 3–26.
25.
HeilmanM. E. (2001). Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women's ascent up the organizational ladder.Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674.
26.
HeilmanM. E.BlockC. J.MartellR. F.SimonM. C. (1989). Has anything changed? Current characterizations of men, women, and managers.Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 935–942.
27.
HeilmanM. E.WallenA. S.FuchsD.TamkinsM. M. (2004). Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks.Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 416–427.
28.
HelfatC. E.HarrisD.WolfsonP. J. (2006). The pipeline to the top: Women and men in the top executive ranks of U.S. corporations.Academy of Management Perspectives, 20(4), 42–64.
29.
HigginsM. C.GulatiR. (2006). Stacking the deck: The effects of top management backgrounds on investor decisions.Strategic Management Journal, 27, 1–25.
30.
JacobsJ. A. (1995). Gender inequality at work. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31.
KreftingL. A.BergerP. K.WallaceM. J. (1978). Contribution of sex distribution, job content, and occupational classification to job sex-typing—2 studies.Journal of Vocational Behavior, 13, 181–191.
32.
KunkelA.DennisM. R.WatersE. (2003). Contemporary university students' ratings of characteristics of men, women, and CEOs.Psychological Reports, 93, 1197–1213.
33.
LandyF. J. (2008). The tenuous bridge between research and reality: The importance of research design in inferences regarding work behavior. In BorgidaE.FiskeS. T. (Eds.), Beyond common sense: Psychological science in the courtroom (pp. 341–352). Malden MA: Blackwell.
34.
LynessK. S.HeilmanM. E. (2006). When fit is fundamental: Performance evaluations and promotions of upper-level female and male managers.Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 777–785.
35.
MeekerB. F.Weitzel-O'NeillP. A. (1977). Sex-roles and interpersonal-behavior in task-oriented groups.American Sociological Review, 42, 91–105.
36.
MullenB. (1991). Group composition, salience, and cognitive representations—The phenomenology of being in a group.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 297–323.
37.
NievaV. F.GutekB. A. (1980). Sex effects on evaluation.Academy of Management Review, 5, 267–276.
38.
NorrisJ. M.WylieA. M. (1995). Gender stereotyping of the managerial role among students in Canada and the United States.Group & Organization Management, 20, 167–182.
39.
PaulhusD. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598–609.
40.
PodolnyJ. M. (2005). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41.
PowellG. N.ButterfieldD. A. (1979). Good manager—Masculine or androgynous.Academy of Management Journal, 22, 395–403.
42.
PowellG. N.ButterfieldD. A. (1989). The good manager—Did androgyny fare better in the 1980s.Group & Organization Studies, 14, 216–233.
43.
PowellG. N.ButterfieldD. A.ParentJ. D. (2002). Gender and managerial stereotypes: Have the times changed?Journal of Management, 28, 177–193.
44.
RaginsB. R.SundstromE. (1989). Gender and power in organizations: A longitudinal perspective.Psychological Bulletin, 106, 51–88.
45.
ReskinB. (1993). Sex segregation in the workplace.Annual Review of Sociology, 19, 241–270.
46.
RidgewayC. L. (1997). Interaction and the conservation of gender inequality: Considering employment.American Sociological Review, 62, 218–235.
47.
RitterB. A.YoderJ. D. (2004). Gender differences in leader emergence persist even for dominant women: An updated confirmation of role congruity theory.Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 187–193.
48.
ScheinV. E. (1973). Relationship between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics.Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 95–100.
49.
ScheinV. E. (1975). Relationships between sex-role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics among female managers.Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 340–344.
50.
ScheinV. E.MuellerR.JacobsonC. (1989). The relationship between sex-role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics among college-students.Sex Roles, 20, 103–110.
51.
ScheinV. E.MuellerR.LituchyT.LiuJ. (1996). Think manager—think male: A global phenomenon?Journal of Organizational Behavior, 17, 33–41.
52.
SheldonO. J.Thomas-HuntM. C.ProellC. A. (2006). When timeliness matters: The moderating effect of status on behavioral reactions to time delay within work interactions.Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1385–1395.
53.
TaylorS. E. (1981). A categorization approach to stereotyping. In HamiltonD. (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 83–114). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
54.
Thomas-HuntM. C.PhillipsK. W. (2004). When what you know is not enough: Expertise and gender dynamics in task groups.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1585–1598.
55.
TosiH. L.EinbenderS. W. (1985). The effects of the type and amount of information in sex-discrimination research—A meta-analysis.Academy of Management Journal, 28, 712–723.
56.
U.S. Department of Labor. (2005). Statistics and data. Retrieved Aug. 26, 2006, from http://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/main.htm.
57.
WirthL. (2001). Breaking through the glass ceiling: Women in management. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Office.
