Support for quotas for women in leadership: The influence of gender stereotypes

Abstract

This study examines support for quotas for women in leadership, a currently highly debated topic in management research and practice. Using a sample of German working adults (N = 761), our results suggest that stereotypes about women (n = 380) are significantly related to support for quotas for women in leadership. Ascriptions of agency to typical women, that is, the extent to which women are generally seen as assertive, active, and strong, were positively related to participants' support for quotas for women in leadership in male‐gendered industries and high hierarchical positions, whereas ascriptions of communality to typical women, that is, the extent to which women are seen as understanding, supportive, and caring, were generally positively related. This pattern emerged for both male and female participants. Unexpectedly, gender‐stereotypic ascriptions to men (n = 381) were also related to support for quotas for women in leadership—with a positive relationship with agency in male‐gendered industries and a general negative relationship with communality, although these results were less pronounced. Implications for organizations are derived from these results, highlighting how the introduction of quotas for women in leadership can be smoothed by addressing how employees see women in terms of agency and communality.

Women's career equality and leadership in organizations: Creating an evidence‐based positive change

“…Despite these challenges in generalizing career processes and goals across contexts, a first theme we identified is that the authors of nearly all of the articles in this special issue explore women's career issues related to issues in accessing or maintaining organizational membership and selection for leadership roles, and positive career‐development experiences across life phases, noting occupational and organizational differences. They do so using a wide array of theoretical perspectives and with attention to hiring riskiness for leader roles (Van Esch, Hopkins, O'Neil, & Bilimoria, ), retention (Ladge, Humberd, & Eddleston, ), turnover (Singh, Zhang, Wan, & Fouad, ), and use of quotas to lessen the impact of gender stereotypes on evaluation of women (Mölders, Brosi, Bekk, Spörrle, & Welp, ) and aspiration and advancement in top positions and spheres of influence (Fritz & van Knippenberg, ; Glass & Cook, ; Gould, Kulik, & Sardeshmukh; Guillén, Mayo, & Karelaia, ). The research is quantitative and qualitative, offering generalizable outcomes for policy considerations as well as depth and breadth.…”

“…In their article “Support for Quotas for Women in Leadership: The Influence of Gender Stereotypes,” Mölders et al () bridge stereotypes and institutional quotas. Their explicit aim is to better understand factors that affect quotas for women in leadership.…”

“…These findings are from numerous contexts and stakeholder groups such as CEOs and Board members in businesses (Glass & Cook, ), women and men engineers (Guillén et al, ), women engineers (Singh et al, ), women and men employees in the United Kingdom (Fritz & van Knippenberg, ) and in Germany (Mölders et al, ), “professionally‐employed new mothers in the United States as they transitioned back to work” (Ladge et al, ), and experiments looking at perceived riskiness of hiring women compared to men leaders (Van Esch et al, ). The studies focused on women in contrast to men or system‐level phenomena.…”

Can institutionalized workplace structures benefit senior women leaders?

“…Through a combination of tokenism, role congruence and gendered stereotypes, women's efforts, next to their male counterparts, are not equal even while they display strong leadership performance (Acker, 2006;Mölders, Brosi, Bekk, Spörrle & Welpe, 2018;Ridgeway, 2014).…”

The HR lady is on board: Untangling the link between HRM's feminine image and HRM's board representation

“…Institutional pressure on organisations, however, can impact women's prospects for attaining powerful positions. Particularly, the literature discussing women on boards (WOBs) reveals that institutional pressure to enhance gender equality in top management confronts the exclusion of women from board positions and encourages organisations to appoint women to executive boards (Grosvold, Rayton, & Brammer, 2016; Iannotta, Gatti, & Huse, 2016; Mölders, Brosi, Bekk, Spörrle, & Welpe, 2018; Ng & Sears, 2017; Sheridan, Ross‐Smith, & Lord, 2014; Terjesen, Aguilera, & Lorenz, 2015; Terjesen & Singh, 2008). Surprisingly, the WOB debate has largely neglected the potential dynamics between pressure for gender equality and gender distribution in specific organisational functions on the board.…”