We attempt to make sense of ongoing gender disparities in the upper ranks of organizations by examining gender bias in leaders’ assessments of managers’ derailment potential. In a large managerial sample (Study 1: N ∼ 12,500), we found that ineffective interpersonal behaviors were slightly less frequent among female managers but slightly more damaging to women than men when present. Evidence of bias was not found in performance evaluations but emerged when leaders were asked about derailment potential in the future. We replicated this pattern of effects in a second large managerial sample (Study 2: N ∼ 35,500) and in two experimental studies (Studies 3 and 4) in which gender and interpersonal behaviors were manipulated. In Study 4, we also showed that when supervisors believe that a manager might derail in the future, they tend to withdraw mentoring support and sponsorship, which are especially critical for women's career advancement. Our research highlights the importance of leaders’ perceptions of derailment potential—which differ from evaluations of performance or promotability—both because they appear to be subject to stereotype‐based gender bias and because they have important implications for the mentoring and sponsorship that male and female managers receive.

No abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The purpose of this study is to explore patterns of importance ratings of managerial competencies in 22 countries in different regions around the globe, to guide specificity in assessing and developing managers in multiple geographies. Additionally, this study examined the utility of clustering countries based on shared culture, as defined by House et al. (2004), to determine whether such clustering aids in interpreting and acting on any differences identified. Design/methodology/approach -The PROFILOR ® for Managers contains 135 behavioral items, grouped into 24 competency scales. The instrument was developed from a review of the management and psychology literatures, exhaustive analysis of a large database (Sevy et al., 1985), job analysis questionnaires and interviews of hundreds of managers representing many functional areas and most major industries. Findings -Results suggest that clustering countries together for the purpose of providing prescriptive guidance for the development of individuals planning expatriate assignments does not clarify such guidance; in fact, it masks unique differences in competency priorities as measured on a country-by-country basis.Research limitations/implications -The participants for this study come from mid-to large-size organizations in 22 countries around the world. The organizations represented sought out management consulting services from a large, highly respected private-sector consultancy. As such, these findings are likely to be generalizable to managers from similar organizations. No attempt has been made to generalize these findings to entrepreneurial start-ups, small local organizations or organizations not inclined to seek Western-style management consulting services. Originality/value -This study is one of the first to examine the effectiveness of the GLOBE clusters as they relate to managerial competencies in multicultural workforces.

This study examines the relationship between behavioral courage and job performance, and explores the possible effects of organizational level and gender on this relationship. With a sample of managers from mid- to large-sized for-profit organizations in the United States, we found that behavioral courage was positively associated with job performance. Our results also revealed significant differences in supervisors’ ratings of behavioral courage between employees at low and high organizational levels. The effects of behavioral courage on job performance did not vary by organizational level. In turn, the moderating effect of gender on the association between behavioral courage and job performance was supported. The study results provide important theoretical and practical implications in the fields of organizational behavior, leadership studies, and human resource development. Recommendations for future research are discussed.

No abstract