Sexism

Owned by Darlene Edgar
Mar 16, 2024
2 min read

Gloor, J. L., Morf, M., Paustian-Underdahl, S., & Backes-Gellner, U. (2020). Fix the game, not the dame: Restoring equity in leadership evaluations. Journal of Business Ethics, 161(3), 497–511. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323995459_Fix_the_Game_Not_the_Dame_Restoring_Equity_in_Leadership_Evaluations

Study 1:

Experimental Setup:

  • Field experiment involving teams with 40%-50% gender balance.

  • Slight variations in team gender composition due to factors like no-shows or newcomers.

  • Team composition ranged from 20% to 63.64% women.

Manipulation Checks:

  • Leader reports and follower ratings confirmed effectiveness of team gender balance manipulation.

  • Balanced teams had significantly more women than male-majority teams.

  • Followers noticed and rated team gender composition in line with the manipulation.

Preliminary Analyses:

  • Data: 426 participants within 32 teams.

  • Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC1) indicated meaningful variance in group perceptions of leader prototypicality.

  • Aggregation justified by high agreement levels and reliable group means.

Hypothesis Testing:

  • Male leaders not rated as more prototypical than female leaders.

  • No main effect of team gender composition on leader prototypicality.

  • Significant interaction: Female leaders rated less prototypical in male-majority teams but not in gender-balanced teams.

Study 2:

Descriptive Statistics:

  • Data: 434 participants within 35 teams.

  • ICC1 indicated meaningful variance in group perceptions of leader prototypicality and trust in the leader.

  • Aggregation supported by high agreement levels and reliable group means.

Hypothesis Testing:

  • Replicated significant interaction effect of leader gender and team gender composition on leader prototypicality.

  • Female leaders rated less prototypical in male-majority teams but not in gender-balanced teams.

  • Leader prototypicality positively associated with leader trust.

  • Mediated moderation effect: Female leaders viewed as less trustworthy in male-dominated teams, but effect eliminated with more women in the team.

Supplementary Analyses:

Statistical Power:

  • Combined data from Studies 1 and 2 for robustness checks.

  • Insufficient statistical power less concerning due to repeated empirical support.

Leader Ratings:

  • Leaders' self-rated prototypicality unaffected by team gender composition.

Leader-Follower Gender Match:

  • Gender match/mismatch between leaders and followers did not explain variance in leader prototypicality.

Discussion:

Theoretical Implications:

  • Causal evidence supporting social identity theory of organizational leadership and boundary conditions of role congruity theory.

  • Potential critical point in team gender composition effectiveness.

  • New insights into leader prototypicality benchmarking and implications for male leaders.

  • Teams designed with gender balance may benefit female leaders.

  • Leadership training programs' efficacy questioned; team-based interventions proposed for gender equity.

  • Interpretations of leader evaluations should consider team gender context.

Ethical Implications:

  • Equity in leadership appraisals crucial for fair treatment of female leaders.

  • Female leaders may bring more ethical leadership styles, benefiting organizations.

  • Inefficient use of female talent in workforce necessitates addressing gender disparities.

Strengths, Limitations, & Future Research (contd.):

  • Methodological rigor in study design and data collection.

  • Limitations include sample representativeness and potential endogeneity.

  • Future research needed in organizational settings and diverse cultural contexts.

Conclusions:

  • Diverse teams benefit female leaders and organizations if designed with gender equity in mind.

  • Restoring gender equity in leadership requires addressing systemic biases and organizational practices.

These additional notes further delve into the practical, ethical, and methodological implications of the study, along with suggestions for future research. They emphasize the importance of addressing gender disparities in leadership through systemic changes and interventions aimed at promoting gender equity.