Gender and cultural differences in leader’s perception

Master Thesis

Official Master in

Working Psychology, Organizations and Human Resources

Barcelona, 25th June 2014

Author: Elena Tecchiati

Tutor: Dr. Carlos M. Moreno Pérez

1

Containt

• Theoretical introduction

– Hypothesis

• Method

– Procedures

– Participants

• Results

• Discussion

– Conclusion

2

Theoretical introduction

Gender bias

Women and Leadership

Hypothesis

3

Gender bias

• The unequal treatment of women in employment opportunity and expectations due to their gender (Jamieson, 1996; Sandberg, 2013)

• “Glass ceiling” as a consequence

– The tendency to prefer men to women when it comes to fill top leadership positions (Yukl, 2011, pp. 466-467)

4

Women in leadership positions

• Women are underrepresented

– In economic settings

– In political settings

– In scientific fields

5

Women who reached the peak

• Reported to suffer from discriminations

• Stronger in male dominated industry

• Phenomena “Double Bind” (Bateson et al. 1956)

6

Explanations for the glass ceiling

• Belief that women do not possess the skills necessary to lead effectively as these skills are viewed as typically masculine (Stogdill, 1974; Schein, 1975)

• Several other explanations, with one common background = competencies and perception / gender bias

7

Feminine competencies

Woman = no leader

Consequences

• Unequal pay

• Certain jobs are related to certain genders according to sex-related stereotypes

Differences

• Testosterone level => Aggressiveness/Assertiveness

• Mathematical abilities

• Visual-spacial abilities

• Verbal abilities

• Education

Maccoby and Jacklin (1974)

Are women better leaders?

• Metaanalyses Eagly et al. 2002-2003 through MLQ => women more transformational

• Congruency with gender bias?

11

Tendence gender stereotype

12

Subjects who prefer a female leader report more previous experience with a woman leader!

Study Seifert (1984)

• Power of stereotypical beliefs

• Male and female participants think that they were working with female and male leaders

• And that the leaders were selected randomly

• In the truth => same standardized communication messages from the experimenter. – Male leader was evaluated clearer

– Female leader was evaluated less fairly selected

13

Study Godoy & Mladinic (2009)

• Description of a male and female leader • Evaluation:

– Dependent variables – labor (leadership effectiveness; task orientation;

interpersonal orientation; cognitive skills; recommendations about organizational recompense; salary and promotion)

– personal issues (general evaluation as person; pleasant and sympathy level; if they would ask the person for support of advice in case of personal problems; if they would establish a friendship with this person)

• No significant difference in evaluation

14

BUT…

• Women problems ascending in interaction with others (e.g. aggression, negotiating)

• Creation of a social reality through communication

• Evaluation needs a situation

15

Gender bias intercultural

• Gender stereotyping different according to cultures (Catalyst, 2007)

16

(Catalyst, 2007)

Hypothesis

1. Male leader > evaluation than the female leader across cultures and gender;

2. In the case of previous experience with a female leader + evaluating the feedback situation where female director, female leader > male leaders when no previous experience with a female leader;

3. Relationship between previous experience and preference for a leader of a certain gender: previous experience with a woman leader means higher preference to work with a female leader.

17

Method

Feedback situation

Questionnaire

Procedures

18

Tool

• Feedback situation in 4 dimensions – Male leader x male subordinate

– Male leader x female subordinate

– Female leader x male subordinate

– Female leader x female subordinate

• Questionnaire – 6 questions

• (4 MLQ + 2 based on previous research)

19

Procedures

1. Tool in English

2. Validation & Changes

3. Translations

4. Validation

5. Paper/pencil

6. Online version

7. SPSS

20

Dimensions

Dimension Leader Subordinate Previous experience

with a female leader

Cultural

background

1 Male Male Yes German

2 Male Male No German

3 Male Male Yes Spanish

4 Male Male No Spanish

5 Male Female Yes German

6 Male Female No German

7 Male Female Yes Spanish

8 Male Female No Spanish

9 Female Male Yes German

10 Female Male No German

11 Female Male Yes Spanish

12 Female Male No Spanish

13 Female Female Yes German

14 Female Female No German

15 Female Female Yes Spanish

16 Female Female No Spanish

21

Participants

• From Germany/Spain

• Consulting sector • Marketing and advertising • Consumer industry • Construction industry • Public sector • Health management • Health industry • Education.

22

Total received questionnaires

• 157 questionnaires from Germany:

– 32 online;

– 125 paper-pencil versions.

• 112 questionnaire from Spain:

– 21 online;

– 91 paper-pencil versions.

• Total 269 questionnaires

23

Dimensions Total

MM MF FF FM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Gender

Spain M 8 4 8 4 9 2 7 3 M 45

F 9 2 11 3 11 4 20 7 F 67

Total 17 6 19 7 20 6 27 10

23 26 26 37 112

Germany M 13 6 17 13 5 6 2 9 M 71

F 13 5 13 8 14 3 14 15 F 85

Total 26 11 30 21 19 9 16 24

37 51 28 40 156

Total 43 17 49 28 39 15 43 34

60 77 54 77 268

Questionnaires’ structure

24

Results

Hypothesis

25

Hypothesis 1

The male leader has a more positive evaluation than the female leader across cultures and gender

26

Result hypothesis 1

No significant difference =

Culture and gender have no influence on evaluation

27

Hypothesis 2

In the case of previous experience with a female leader and at the same time evaluating the feedback situation where a woman is acting as a director, individuals tend to evaluate the female leader higher than the male counterpart when individuals have no previous experience with a female leader;

28

Result hypothesis 2

No significant difference =

Previous experience with a female leader have no influence on the evaluation

29

Hypothesis 3

There is a relationship between previous experience and the preference for a leader of a certain gender: previous experience with a woman leader means higher preference to work with a female leader

30

Result hypothesis 3

No significant difference =

Previous experience has no influence on the preference for a certain gender

• No relationship between personnel responsibility and the preference for a certain gender’s leader when taking into consideration the subgroup “No preference”

31

Discussion

Possible explanations for results

Advice for future research

32

Cultural differences

• Barcelona as Spain? Or more like Germany?

• Future testing required in leaders’ perception

33

Stereotype

• Woman leader difficulties ascending, not in final position

• Future testing required

• Developmental programs instead of hiring more / amount of women (equal chances)

– because of no-influence of previous experience with a female leader

34

Developmental programs

• In communication skills

• Gender bias (awareness for men and women)

• For men supporting wives

• For male leaders supporting men and women with no distinction

• Impact study required (long lasting study)

35

Feedback

• Because of differences in evaluation: Future studies needed to evaluate feedback in diversity setting in order to find out the “good” feedback

– Important for developmental programs as well

• Different options for future studies

36

Main References

• Bateson, G., Jackson, D. D., Haley, J., & Weakland, J. (1956). Towards a theory of schizophrenia. Behavioral Science, 1, 251–264

• Catalyst (2006). Different cultures, similar perceptions: stereotyping of western European Business Leaders. New York: Catalyst Publication. Retrieved from http://www.catalyst.org/system/files/Different_Cultures%2C_Similar_Perceptions_Stereotyping_of_Western_European_Business_Leaders.pdf

• Eagly, A.H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M.C. & Van Engen, M.L. (2003). Transformational, transactional and laisser faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 569-591.

• Godoy, L. & Mladinic, A. (2009). Estereotipos y roles de género en la evaluación laboral y personal de hombres y mujeres en cargos de dirección. Psykhe, 18, 2, 51-64.

• Jamieson, K.H. (1995). Beyond the double bind. Women and leadership. New York: Oxford University Press.

• Newport, F., & Wilke J. (2013). Americans Still Prefer a Male Boss. A plurality report that a boss' gender would make no difference. Gullop Economy. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/165791/americans-prefer-male-boss.aspx

• Sandberg, S. (2013). Lean in. Women, work, and the will to lead. London: W.H. Allen.

• Stogdill, R.M. (1974). Handbook of leadership: A survey of the literature. New York: Free Press.

• Schein, V.E. (1975). Relationships between sex role stereotypes and requisite management characteristics among female managers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(60), 340-344.

• Seifert, C.M. (1984). Reactions to leaders: effects of sex of leader, sex of subordinate, method of leader selection and task outcome. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. Sciences and Engineering, 45(12), 3999.

• Yukl, G. (2011). Leadership in organizations. New Delhi: Dorling Kindersley for Pearson Education.

37

38

Grácies

Contact

• Elena Tecchiati

elena.tecchiati@cdc-leadership.com

39