Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Women’s underperformance in MBA programs has been the subject of recent debate and policy interventions, despite a lack of rigorous evidence documenting when and why it occurs. The current studies document a performance gap, specifying its contours and contributing factors. Two behaviors by female students that may factor into the gap are public conformity and private internalization. We predicted that women conform to the norm associating maleness with technical prowess by minimizing their public assertiveness in class discussions and meetings, but that they do not internalize the norm by reducing private effort. Data from multiple cohorts of a top-ranked MBA program reveal female underperformance occurred in technical subjects (e.g., accounting), but not social subjects (e.g., marketing). As predicted, the gender effect ran not through private effort but through public assertiveness, even controlling for gender differences in interests and aptitudes. These findings support some current policy interventions while casting doubt on others.

Keywords

gender diversity norms performance business education assertiveness

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Amanatullah

E. T.

Morris

M. W.

(2010). Negotiating gender roles: Gender differences in assertive negotiating are mediated by women’s fear of backlash and attenuated when negotiating on behalf of others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 256-267.

Amanatullah

E. T.

Tinsley

C. H.

(2013). Punishing female negotiators for asserting too much…or not enough: Exploring why advocacy moderates backlash against assertive female negotiators. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 120, 110-122.

As academic gender gap declines, there is still work to be done. (2011, April 25). The Harbus. Retrieved from http://www.harbus.org/2011/gender-gap/

Asch

S. E.

(1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In Guetzkow

(Ed.), Groups, leadership and men (pp. 177-190). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Press.

Baron-Cohen

(2003). The essential difference: Men, women and the extreme male brain. London, England: Penguin.

Biernat

Manis

(1994). Shifting standards and stereotype-based judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 5-20.

Blackman

(2011, August 19). More women head to school for M.B.A.s. U. S. News & World Report. Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/mba-admissions-strictly-business/2011/08/19/more-women-head-to-school-for-mbas

Brescoll

V. L.

(2012). Who takes the floor and why: Gender, power, and volubility in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 56, 622-641.

Butler

Waldroop

. (2004). A function-centered model of interest assessment for business careers. Journal of Career Assessment, 12, 270-284.

10.

Cheryan

Plaut

V. C.

Davies

P. G.

Steele

C. M.

(2009). Ambient belonging: How stereotypical cues impact gender participation in computer science. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1045-1060.

11.

Cheryan

Siy

J. O.

Vichayapai

Drury

B. J.

Kim

(2011). Do female and male role models who embody STEM stereotypes hinder women’s anticipated success in STEM? Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 656-664.

12.

Cialdini

R. B.

Kallgren

C. A.

Reno

R. R.

(1991). The focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. In Zanna

M. P.

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 201-234). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

13.

Cohen

(1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159.

14.

Columbia Business School. (n.d.). Class profile. Retrieved from https://www8.gsb.columbia.edu/programs-admissions/mba/admissions/class-profile

15.

Crandall

(1988). Social contagion of binge eating. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 588-598.

16.

Cullen

M. J.

Waters

S. D.

Sackett

P. R.

(2006). Testing stereotype threat theory predictions for math-identified and non-math-identified students by gender. Human Performance, 19, 421-440.

17.

DeRue

D. S

. (2009). Quantity or quality? Work experience as a predictor of MBA student success (GMAC Research reports RR-09-9). McLean, VA: GMAC.

18.

Diekman

A. B.

Brown

E. R.

Johnston

A. M.

Clark

E. K.

(2010). Seeking congruity between goals and roles a new look at why women opt out of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. Psychological Science, 21, 1051-1057.

19.

Else-Quest

N. M.

Hyde

J. S.

Linn

M. C.

(2010). Cross-national patterns of gender differences in mathematics: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 103-127.

20.

Feingold

(1988). Cognitive gender differences are disappearing. American Psychologist, 43, 95-103.

21.

Frank

R. H.

Gilovich

Regan

D. T.

(1993). Does studying economics inhibit cooperation? The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 7, 159-171.

22.

Freeman

Eddy

S. L.

McDonough

Smith

M. K.

Okoroafor

Jordt

. . . Wenderoth

M. P.

(2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 8410-8415.

23.

Gellman

(2015, May 6). Business schools are fighting to recruit top women. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://www.wsj.com/articles/why-business-schools-are-fighting-over-top-women-1430957422

24.

Graduate Management Admission Council. (2015). Application Trends Survey [Data file]. Available from http://www.gmac.com/~/media/Files/gmac/Research/admissions-and-application-trends/2015-application-trends-web-release-1.pdf

25.

Graduate Management Admission Council. (n.d.). GMAT® Interactive Profile [Data file] Available from http://www.gmac.com/market-intelligence-and-research/gmat-statistics/interactive-profile-of-gmat-candidates.aspx

26.

Hancock

(1999). The gender difference: Validity of standardized admission tests in predicting MBA performance. Journal of Education for Business, 75, 91-93.

27.

Harvard Business School. (n.d.-a). Admissions class profile. Retrieved from http://www.hbs.edu/mba/admissions/class-profile/Pages/default.aspx

28.

Harvard Business School. (n.d.-b). Admissions policies. Retrieved from http://www.hbs.edu/mba/admissions/application-process/Pages/admission-policies.aspx

29.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

30.

Heilman

M. E.

Wallen

A. S.

Fuchs

Tamkins

M. M.

(2004). Penalties for success: Reactions to women who succeed at male gender-typed tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89, 416-427.

31.

Hyde

J. S.

Fennema

Lamon

S. J.

(1990). Gender differences in mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 139-155.

32.

Hyde

J. S.

Linn

M. C.

(1988). Gender differences in verbal ability: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 104, 53-69.

33.

Inzlicht

Ben-Zeev

(2000). A threatening intellectual environment: Why females are susceptible to experiencing problem-solving deficits in the presence of males. Psychological Science, 11, 365-371.

34.

Jeong

S. H.

Harrison

. (2016). Glass breaking, strategy making, and value creating: meta-analytic outcomes of females as CEOs and TMT members. Academy of Management Journal. Advance online publication. doi:10.5465/amj.2014.0716

35.

Kantor

(2013, September 7). Harvard Business School case study: Gender equity. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/08/education/harvard-case-study-gender-equity.html

36.

Kitroeff

(2014, November 11). Best business schools 2014: Duke tops full-time MBA list, Harvard slips. Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved from http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2014-11-11/best-business-schools-2014-duke-is-top-full-time-mba-harvard-slips

37.

Kitroeff

Rodkin

(2015). The real payoff from an MBA is different for men and women. Bloomberg Businessweek. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-10-20/the-real-cost-of-an-mba-is-different-for-men-and-women

38.

Korn

(2014, April 17). B-School deans get to work at the White House. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from http://blogs.wsj.com/atwork/2014/04/17/b-school-deans-get-to-work-at-the-white-house/

39.

Law School Admission Council. (n.d.). Matriculants by ethnic and gender group [Data file]. Retrieved from http://www.lsac.org/lsacresources/data/ethnic-gender-matriculants

40.

Lindberg

S. M.

Hyde

J. S.

Petersen

J. L.

Linn

M. C.

(2010). New trends in gender and mathematics performance: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 1123-1135.

41.

Morris

M. W.

Hong

Y. Y.

Chiu

C. Y.

Liu

(2015). Normology: Integrating insights about social norms to understand cultural dynamics. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 129, 1-13.

42.

Moss-Racusin

C. A.

Rudman

L. A.

(2010). Disruptions in women’s self-promotion: The backlash avoidance model. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 186-202.

43.

Murphy

M. C.

Steele

C. M.

Gross

J. J.

(2007). Signaling threat: How situational cues affect women in math, science, and engineering settings. Psychological Science, 18, 879-885.

44.

Muthén

L. K.

Muthén

B. O.

(2012). Statistical analysis with latent variables: User’s guide (Version, 7). Retrieved from http://www.statmodel.com/download/usersguide/Mplus%20user%20guide%20Ver_7_r3_web.pdf

45.

Newcomb

T. M.

(1943). Personality and social change. New York, NY: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.

46.

Nolan

Moran

Kotschwar

(2016, February). Is gender diversity profitable? Evidence from a global survey (Working Paper No. 16-3). Retrieved from http://www.piie.com/publications/wp/wp16-3.pdf

47.

Nosek

B. A.

Banaji

M. R.

Greenwald

A. G.

(2002). Math = male, me = female, therefore math ≠ me. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 44-59.

48.

Owens

Massey

D. S.

(2011). Stereotype threat and college academic performance: A latent variables approach. Social Science Research, 40, 150-166.

49.

Patton

. (2014). Marry by choice, not by chance: Advice for finding the right one at the right time. New York, NY: Gallery Books.

50.

Rudman

(1998). Self-promotion as a risk factor for women: The costs and benefits of counterstereotypical impression management. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 629-645.

51.

Sandberg

S. L.

(2013). Women, work, and the will to lead. New York, NY: Alfred A Knopf.

52.

Schmidt

F. L.

(2011). A theory of sex differences in technical aptitude and some supporting evidence. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 560-573.

53.

Sherif

(1936). The psychology of social norms. New York, NY: Harper.

54.

Silvia

P. J.

(2008). Interest—The curious emotion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 57-60.

55.

Stanford Business School. (2015). Entering class profile. Retrieved from https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/programs/mba/admission/evaluation-criteria/class-profile

56.

Steele

C. M.

(1992, April 1). Race and the schooling of Black Americans. The Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1992/04/race-and-the-schooling-of-black-americans/306073/

57.

Twenge

J. M.

(2001). Changes in women’s assertiveness in response to status and roles: A cross-temporal meta-analysis, 1931-1993. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 133-145.

58.

Wang

Malhotra

Murnighan

J. K.

(2011). Economics education and greed. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10, 643-660.

59.

The White House, Office of the Press Secretary. (2015, August 5). Fact sheet: White House hosts convening of business school deans and the business community on expanding opportunities for women in business [Press release]. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/08/05/fact-sheet-white-house-hosts-convening-business-school-deans-and

60.

Wood

Christensen

P. N.

Hebl

M. R.

Rothgerber

(1997). Conformity to sex-typed norms, affect, and the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 523-535.

61.

Woodcock

Graziano

W. G.

Branch

S. E.

Habashi

M. M.

Ngambeki

Evangelou

(2013). Person and thing orientations: Psychological correlates and predictive utility. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 116-123.

62.

Wright

R. E.

Bachrach

D. G.

(2003). Testing for bias against female test takers of the Graduate Management Admissions Test and potential impact on admissions to graduate programs in business. Journal of Education for Business, 78, 324-328.

63.

Yang

D. R.

(2001). Predicting academic performance in management education: An empirical investigation of MBA success. Journal of Education for Business, 77, 15-20.

64.

Yeaple

(2012, July 9). Is the MBA case method passé? Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/ronaldyeaple/2012/07/09/is-the-mba-case-method-passe/#1d486fea3145

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.12 MB

Understanding the MBA Gender Gap: Women Respond to Gender Norms by Reducing Public Assertiveness but Not Private Effort

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material