The interactive effect of influence tactic, applicant gender, and type of job on hiring recommendations

Abstract

Abstract:The effects of influence tactic, applicant gender, and job type were examined in the selection context. A male or female applicant used either an assertive, rational, or exchange influence tactic in a simulated job interview script for either a sales representative or cost accounting position. Three hundred four managers, (271 male and 26 female, predominantly white) evaluated the applicant and indicated the likelihood that they would recommend hiring the applicant. Results indicated that tactics were differentially effective in generating favorable hiring recommendations and ratings of the applicant, depending on whether the tactic was used by a male or female applicant and on the job type sought. Article:Although researchers have investigated the effect of downward influence tactics for years, they have recently shown more interest in upward influencing tactics in intraorganizational contexts (e.g. see Dockery & Steiner, 1990;Vecchio & Sussman, 1991). This shift occurred as researchers realized that influence tactics not only affect subordinate's perceptions and resulting organizational outcomes, but also shape supervisors' perceptions and subsequent decisions. For example, Schlenker (1980) and Kipnis & Schmidt (1988) found that employees' influence attempts affected subsequent performance evaluations and salary assignments by their superiors. While studies have examined managers' and subordinates' influence attempts, the generalizability of those findings to boundary-spanning situations, such as the selection process remains relatively unexplored.This study is the first investigation to focus on the selection interview and the effect that applicants' influence tactics have on managers' evaluations of the applicant and the managers' subsequent hiring recommendations. The impact of three different influence tactics-rationality, assertiveness and exchange-are compared in simulated job interviews of both a male and a female applicant who are applying for two different types of positions-a cost accountant and a sales representative. Use of this research design enables us to examine the effects of applicant gender, influence tactic, and type of job and their interactions on evaluations of the applicant and on hiring recommendations. Potential interactive effects of these three variables will be explored in the following paragraphs.

Gender (In)Consistent Communication via Social Media and Hireability: An Exploratory Study

“…However, as mentioned previously, women who display competence during job interviews are less liked and seen as less socially skilled and hirable [21,23]. For instance, competent communication styles used by female job applicants were seen as less persuasive and less hirable to hiring executives than women using less competent communication [10]. This same study found that men who used a competent communication style were seen as the most persuasive and hirable because engaging in behaviors that signal competence (e.g., self-promotion) is normative for men.…”

Gender, status and the use of power strategies

“…Also, behavior inconsistent with gender stereotypes was related to negative organizational outcomes such as low performance ratings and/or inability to obtain mentoring functions (Tepper et al, 1993). Although a few studies did not reveal a bias against women using (sex-role incongruent) direct influence behavior (Aguinis & Adams, 1998;Izraeli, 1987), some evidence has been obtained showing that male applicants using a direct and assertive strategy when applying for a job are more likely to be recommended for it than females using the same strategy (Buttner & McEnally, 1996).…”

Women as Expert Witnesses: A Review of the Literature

“…The answer appears to be no. Several studies (Buttner & McEnally, ; Carli, ; Reid, Keerie, & Palomares, ), including a meta‐analysis (Eagly et al, ), have shown that women who act like men when in masculine or leadership roles (e.g., assertive language, dominant or directive interpersonal style) are perceived negatively compared with their male counterparts. The devaluation of women in these circumstances is greatest when the evaluators are men (Carli, ; Carli, LaFleur, & Loeber, ; Eagly et al, ; Matschiner & Murnen, ; Reid et al, ).…”

“…Women experts might also be mindful of the social psychological literature showing that women leaders are perceived negatively when they adopt masculine characteristics while serving in “masculine” roles. Given that the expert witness role is traditionally a masculine social role, the literature suggests that women who adopt the role should demonstrate some feminine traits while in the role (e.g., Buttner & McEnally, ; Carli, ; Carli et al, ; Eagly et al, ; Reid et al, ). The particulars of how this might look are not well understood, and thus research is needed to shed light on this question as well.…”