Gender and Leadership. Gary N. Powell
Читать онлайн книгу.
to gradual revision as new pieces of information, either confirming or disconfirming, are received. According to the conversion model, stereotypes change suddenly in response to highly salient and critical pieces of disconfirming information. The bookkeeping model is “deliberate, methodical, and predictable” in nature, whereas the conversion model is “somewhat erratic, impulsive, and unpredictable” (Rothbart, 1981, p. 176). If new information about the accuracy of a given stereotype is moderately disconfirming, the bookkeeping model would predict moderate change in it and the conversion model would predict no change. However, if new information overwhelmingly discredits the stereotype, both models would predict substantial change in it.
Thus, there are theoretical reasons for why gender and leader stereotypes may have changed over time. The key determinant of whether a stereotype actually changes according to Rothbart (1981) is whether there has been sufficient disconfirming information to trigger change according to either the bookkeeping or the conversion model.
Chapter 1 described the onset of a period of considerable social change in the 1970s, roughly five decades ago. The changes that have occurred since then in women's educational attainment in preparation for managerial and professional careers and in their workplace status have been pronounced (Powell, 2019; Powell & Butterfield, 2015a). The level of gender segregation of occupations has dropped in most nations since the 1970s, primarily due to the increased employment of women in male-dominated occupations (Powell, 2019; Seron et al., 2016). Overall, the level of societal change that has occurred over the last five decades would seem sufficient enough to promote change in both gender and leader stereotypes according to Rothbart's (1981) bookkeeping and conversion models of stereotype change.
Yet gender stereotypes have exhibited relatively little change (Broverman et al., 1972; Eagly et al., 2020; Haines et al., 2016). How may the general stability in gender stereotypes be explained? Increases in women's educational attainment and workplace status according to indicators such as their labor force participation rate and their proportion of the labor force and managerial positions seem to have mostly stalled or slightly reversed direction during the 21st century so far; most of the changes in women's status over the last five decades actually occurred during the last three decades of the 20th century (Powell, 2019; Powell & Butterfield 2015a). Eagly and colleagues (2020) suggested that this may be because women tend to enter the labor force by assuming existing or newly-created jobs that call for more feminine or communal qualities than other jobs, even within male-dominated occupations. Gender segregation in the workplace may also be resilient due to continued gender segregation within households, with women performing or being responsible for most of the housework in heterosexual households (Breen & Cooke, 2005; Warren, 2011) even when they earn more than their male partners (Lyonette & Crompton, 2015). These factors may have contributed to maintaining gender stereotypes despite the overall increase in women's societal status over the last five decades.
However, given the same set of factors, leader stereotypes have changed somewhat, so that they now place less emphasis on masculinity in the past. What else might be operating that would allow for modest change in leader stereotypes? In recent decades, new theories of effective leadership have emerged that place greater emphasis on feminine traits associated with women than earlier theories based primarily on observations of male leaders (Powell & Butterfield, 2015a; Stogdill, 1974). For example, there has been an explosion of interest since the 1990s in theories of transformational leadership (Bass, 1985), a leadership style that has been more associated with the female than the male gender stereotype (Bass et al., 1996; Kark, 2004). In the same vein, Alimo-Metcalfe (2010) found support for an essentially feminine model of inclusive leadership. Further, best-selling books on management have tended to emphasize traits and behaviors associated more with women than men, thereby contributing to what Fondas (1997, p. 257) called the “feminization” of management. These factors may have been sufficient to promote a gradual change in leader stereotypes de-emphasizing masculinity that is consistent with Rothbart's (1981) bookkeeping model of stereotype change, but insufficient to eliminate the overall emphasis on masculinity in leader stereotypes that would be consistent with the conversion model of stereotype change.
Conclusions
The linkage between gender and leader stereotypes emphasizing masculinity has significant implications, especially for people who aspire to or already hold leadership positions. It places women at a disadvantage compared to men with equivalent credentials and experience, because the perceived incongruity or lack of fit between the leader role and women's gender role fosters their legitimacy as leaders being questioned (Eagly & Karau, 2002; Heilman, 1983, 2012; Perry et al., 1994). As a result, women are less likely to perceive themselves as good leaders than men do (Powell & Butterfield, 2015a), which may make them less likely than men to develop their managerial skills, pursue careers in the managerial ranks, or pursue careers in the top managerial ranks (Heilman, 2012).
When women assume leader roles, leader stereotypes act as constraints on their behavior. Many organizations exert strong pressure on their members to conform to standards of behavior dictated by those in positions of power and authority. As long as men remain in the majority in top management ranks and increases in women's status in the 21st century remain stalled (Powell, 2019; Powell & Butterfield, 2015a), the masculine leader stereotype is likely to prevail, and female leaders will be expected to behave as male leaders. In this way, a leader stereotype emphasizing masculinity becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy (Eden, 2003).
However, leader stereotypes do not necessarily apply to the actual practice of management. As noted earlier, stereotypes of all kinds tend to be durable and may not reflect current realities. Stereotypes of leaders as possessing predominantly masculine traits may not reflect what actually makes for effective leaders. Instead, these stereotypes may reflect only that most managers have been men and that most men have been expected to conform to a norm of masculinity.
Further, leader stereotypes may be dependent on the racial and ethnic composition of the management ranks. The vast majority of both female and male managers, especially at top management levels, are whites, with women of color being the most underrepresented group (Piazza, 2016). Leader stereotypes may largely reflect beliefs about the characteristics of leaders from the dominant racial and ethnic group in the managerial ranks and ignore the characteristics of leaders from other groups (Parker & ogilvie, 1996; Sanchez-Hucles & Davis, 2010).
In conclusion, I expect that the linkage between gender and leader stereotypes is likely to continue to emphasize masculinity, even if there are gradual declines in this emphasis. I see the emphasis on masculinity in leader stereotypes as unlikely to go away entirely, at least anytime soon, because the forces that maintain it are so strong. Further, it is likely to be reinforced by the continued predominance of men in top management positions, which leads us to the next chapter.
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.