No abstract

Using archival organizational data, the authors examined relationships of gender and type of position (i.e., line or staff) to performance evaluations of 448 upper-level managers, and relationships of performance evaluations to promotions during the subsequent 2 years. Consistent with the idea that there is a greater perceived lack of fit between stereotypical attributes of women and requirements of line jobs than staff jobs, women in line jobs received lower performance ratings than women in staff jobs or men in either line or staff jobs. Moreover, promoted women had received higher performance ratings than promoted men and performance ratings were more strongly related to promotions for women than men, suggesting that women were held to stricter standards for promotion.Keywords: gender bias, gender stereotypes, performance appraisal, promotion, glass ceiling Although their presence in the management ranks is increasing, women continue to be underrepresented in senior management at many large private-sector companies (Lyness, 2002;Powell, 1999). One possible explanation is that there are gender differences in performance evaluations, and how women managers' performance is evaluated relative to men's performance influences women's subsequent career success. Yet, relatively little is known about whether or when performance evaluations of women in upper-level management jobs differ from those of their male counterparts, or if female managers' performance ratings differ depending on the types of jobs they hold. Moreover, it is not clear from prior research how performance evaluations are related to the actual career progress of men and women managers. The present study addresses these issues. Performance EvaluationsThe perceived lack of person-job fit has been used to explain the occurrence of gender bias against women in organizational decisions about managers including performance evaluations. That is, the perceived incongruity between stereotypically based attributes ascribed to women (e.g., kind, caring, and relationshiporiented) and the attributes ascribed to men (e.g., tough, forceful, and achievement-oriented) believed to be necessary for success at male gender-typed jobs, is thought to give rise to expectations that women will perform poorly in these positions, and the greater the perceived lack of fit, the more negative the expectations (Heilman, 1983(Heilman, , 1995(Heilman, , 2001). The lack-of-fit model further asserts that these expectations play a key role in evaluative processes because there is a tendency to perpetuate and confirm them. These expectations become the lens through which information is filtered, including what behavior is attended to, how that behavior is interpreted, and whether it is remembered when critical decisions are made. As a consequence, the negative expectations resulting from perceptions of lack of fit detrimentally affect how women are regarded and how their work is evaluated when they are in traditionally male jobs.There is empirical evidence to support the lack-of-fit mo...

This study compares the careers of matched samples of 69 female executives and 69 male executives by examining perceived barriers and facilitators of advancement, self-reported developmental experiences, and career histories. Consistent with tokenism theory, women reported greater barriers, such as lack of culture fit and being excluded from informal networks, and greater importance of having a good track record and developing relationships to facilitate advancement than did men. Career success, measured by organizational level and compensation, was positively related to breadth of experience and developmental assignments for both genders, but successful women were less likely than successful men to report that mentoring facilitated their advancement. Developmental experiences and career histories were similar for female and male executives, but men had more overseas assignments and women had more assignments with nonauthority relationships.

In this study the authors compare career and work experiences of executive women and men. Female (n = 51) and male (n = 56) financial services executives in comparable jobs were studied through archival information on organizational outcomes and career histories, and survey measures of work experiences. Similarities were found in several organizational outcomes, such as compensation, and many work attitudes. Important differences were found, however, with women having less authority, receiving fewer stock options, and having less international mobility than men. Women at the highest executive levels reported more obstacles than lower level women. The gender differences coupled with women's lower satisfaction with future career opportunities raise questions about whether women are truly above the glass ceiling or have come up against a 2nd, higher ceiling.

No abstract