We hope you enjoy reading this article from Human Relations – it will be free to access until 30 June:
Does gender bias against female leaders persist? Quantitative and qualitative data from a large-scale survey
Kim M Elsesser and Janet Lever
Human Relations December 2011 64: 1555-1578
http://hum.sagepub.com/content/64/12/1555.full.pdf+html
Abstract
The present study of 60,470 women and men examined evaluations of participants' current managers as well as their preferences for male and female managers, in general. A cross-sex bias emerged in the ratings of one's current boss, where men judged their female bosses more favorably and women judged male bosses more favorably. The quality of relationships between subordinates and managers were the same for competent male and female managers. A small majority (54%) of participants claimed to have no preference for the gender of their boss, but the remaining participants reported preferring male over female bosses by more than a 2:1 ratio. Qualitative analysis of the participants' justifications for this preference are presented, and results are discussed within the framework of role congruity theory.
Implications
The results of the present study offer encouraging evidence of changing attitudes toward female leaders. The gender differences found in the ratings of participants' male and female leaders were very small or nonexistent, and a majority of participants claim to have no preference for the gender of their boss. These results certainly indicate a growing acceptance of female leaders, and serve as a reminder that stereotypes are less likely to be applied when sufficient individuating information is available. Unfortunately, often times, decisions such as hiring a new manager are made by those who do not know the job candidates well, and, therefore, bias may persist. Indeed, Lyness and Judiesch (1999) found women are much more likely to be promoted into a management roles than to be hired into them.
Also encouraging, both the quantitative and qualitative results of the present study suggested that exposure to female bosses reduced bias against female leaders. Deutsch (2007) is optimistic that the stereotypes will be reduced or disappear as increased exposure to women in leadership positions 'may decrease the difference in how competent and assertive men and women are perceived to be . . .' (p. 115). In other words, over time, the traits required for successful leadership will be seen as gender neutral, rather than being seen as incongruous with the female role.
Furthermore, our data indicate a feminizing of the management role, with our participants favoring sensitive over direct managers, regardless of the managers' gender. Management scholars have recently been advocating a shift toward a more feminine style of leadership that emphasizes cooperation and a more democratic approach than the traditional masculine leadership style (Eagly and Karau, 2002; Fondas, 1997; Helgesen, 1990; Rosener, 1995). If the characteristics of the ideal manager become more communal, the female gender role and the management role will no longer be incongruous, resulting in greater acceptance and reduced prejudice toward female leaders in the future.
________________________________________
Special Issue Calls for papers
________________________________________
Submit by 30 June 2013!
Economic inequality and management
http://www.tavinstitute.org/humanrelations/special_issues/Economic_inequalities.html
Submit by 31 May 2014:
30th anniversary – Beyond Morgan's eight metaphors
http://www.tavinstitute.org/humanrelations/special_issues/Morgan.html
As always, please get in touch if you have any comments or queries about Human Relations.
All best wishes,
Claire Castle
Managing Editor, Human Relations
Telephone: +44 (0)7432740583
Email: c.castle@tavinstitute.org
www.humanrelationsjournal.org
Human Relations 2011 Impact Factor:
2-year impact factor: 1.729
5-year impact factor: 2.376
Source: 2011 Journal Citation Reports® (Thomson Reuters, 2012)