Does Leader Same-sex Sexual Orientation Matter to Leadership Effectiveness? A Four-study Model-testing Investigation

Abstract

Despite the legalization of same-sex marriage in the United States (U.S.) and an increasing number of out gay and lesbian business leaders, we have little knowledge of the role played by leaders' same-sex sexual orientation in the leadership process. To fill this important research void, we drew from a recent theoretical model on leaders' sexual orientation and conducted four experimental studies designed to test and retest whether leaders' same-sex sexual orientation affects followers' leadership perceptions and conformity to influence attempts, and how the intersectionality of leaders' same-sex sexual orientation with leaders' gender orientation and follower characteristics may modify the influences of leaders' same-sex sexual orientation on the follower outcomes. Based on over 2,100 working adults in the U.S., the results of the four studies, where leaders were depicted as charismatic, indicate that leaders' same-sex sexual orientation could have negative impacts on the follower outcomes. However, same-sex sexual orientation leaders did not suffer double stigma penalization by having additional marginalized identities (e.g., also being women). Female followers were more supportive of same-sex sexual orientation leaders than male followers. Our research advances knowledge of and responds to calls for more research attention to leader sexual orientation in the leadership process. Research and practical implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual (LGB) peoples' leadership self-effectiveness: The roles of internalized sexual stigma, LGB positive identity, and traditional masculinity

“…In-depth, we investigated the direct and interactive associations of internalized sexual stigma, LGB positive identity, traditional masculinity-femininity, and participants' gender with leadership self-effectiveness. Although the current literature includes studies on how LGBTQ+ individuals' leadership effectiveness is perceived by heterosexual people (Morton, 2017;Clarke and Arnold, 2018;Wang et al, 2022), there are not many studies on how LGBTQ+ individuals evaluate their effectiveness (but see Salvati et al, 2021a). Furthermore, the current literature focuses on how gay male employees are perceived for leadership positions; (Morton, 2017;Clarke and Arnold, 2018;De Cristofaro et al, 2020;Pellegrini et al, 2020;Salvati et al, 2021a), whereas studies considering lesbian women and bisexual individuals are more scarce (Fasoli and Hegarty, 2020;Shamloo et al, 2022;Wang et al, 2022).…”

“…Although the current literature includes studies on how LGBTQ+ individuals' leadership effectiveness is perceived by heterosexual people (Morton, 2017;Clarke and Arnold, 2018;Wang et al, 2022), there are not many studies on how LGBTQ+ individuals evaluate their effectiveness (but see Salvati et al, 2021a). Furthermore, the current literature focuses on how gay male employees are perceived for leadership positions; (Morton, 2017;Clarke and Arnold, 2018;De Cristofaro et al, 2020;Pellegrini et al, 2020;Salvati et al, 2021a), whereas studies considering lesbian women and bisexual individuals are more scarce (Fasoli and Hegarty, 2020;Shamloo et al, 2022;Wang et al, 2022). Therefore, the current study aims at filling the gap by putting emphasis on perceived self-effectiveness and including gay, lesbian, and bisexual participants.…”

“…On the other hand, Fasoli and Hegarty (2020) focused on the impact of sexual orientation vocal cues on heterosexual peoples' evaluations of leadership suitability and employability, founding that lesbian-sounding women were evaluated as less suitable than heterosexual-sounding women, and that the attributions of stereotypical masculinity to lesbiansounding women were shown to be irrelevant to discrimination. Also, the study by Wang et al (2022) showed that same-sex leaders with other marginalized identities (i.e., being women) do not suffer a double stigma penalization. Based on social role theory and the role congruity model, we might infer that LGBTQ+ individuals with masculine self-perception are more likely to see themselves as potential effective leaders (Salvati et al, 2021a;Shamloo et al, 2022), even though other studies showed inconsistent results for lesbian women (Fasoli and Hegarty, 2020;Wang et al, 2022).…”

“…Also, the study by Wang et al (2022) showed that same-sex leaders with other marginalized identities (i.e., being women) do not suffer a double stigma penalization. Based on social role theory and the role congruity model, we might infer that LGBTQ+ individuals with masculine self-perception are more likely to see themselves as potential effective leaders (Salvati et al, 2021a;Shamloo et al, 2022), even though other studies showed inconsistent results for lesbian women (Fasoli and Hegarty, 2020;Wang et al, 2022).…”

Sexual Orientation, Workplace Authority and Occupational Segregation: Evidence from Germany

“…Pringle, 2008) and stereotypes about LGBT people in leadership positions (e.g. Barrantes and Eaton, 2018; Wang et al, 2022).…”