Are Women More Likely to Be Hired or Promoted into Management Positions?

Lyness, Karen S.; Judiesch, Michael K.

doi:10.1006/jvbe.1998.1646

Cited by 91 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, often times, decisions such as hiring a new manager are made by those who do not know the job candidates well, and, therefore, bias may persist. Indeed, Lyness and Judiesch (1999) found women are much more likely to be promoted into a management roles than to be hired into them.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does gender bias against female leaders persist? Quantitative and qualitative data from a large-scale survey

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study of 60,470 women and men examined evaluations of participants' current managers as well as their preferences for male and female managers, in general. A cross-sex bias emerged in the ratings of one's current boss, where men judged their female bosses more favorably and women judged male bosses more favorably. The quality of relationships between subordinates and managers were the same for competent male and female managers. A small majority (54%) of participants claimed to have no preference for the gender of their boss, but the remaining participants reported preferring male over female bosses by more than a 2:1 ratio. Qualitative analysis of the participants' justifications for this preference are presented, and results are discussed within the framework of role congruity theory.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does gender bias against female leaders persist? Quantitative and qualitative data from a large-scale survey

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While internal barriers are undoubtedly important, recent studies show that many executive jobs are filled by external hires (Lazear and Oyer 2004;Cappelli and Hamori 2005;Fernandez and Abraham 2010;Hassink and Russo 2010;Fernandez and Abraham 2011;Fernandez and Campero 2015) and that managers hired externally tend to be better paid than those promoted from within the firm (Harris and Helfat 1997;Bidwell 2011; but see Hassink and Russo 2008). Demand-side gender biases can occur also in the external labor market, and some authors argue that female executives benefit less than men from external labor market transitions (Brett and Stroh 1997;Lyness and Judiesch 1999;Hom et al 2008; but see Gorman and Kmec 2009). Indeed, extant research suggests that discriminatory screening is more likely to occur at the hiring interface than at any other point in the employment process (Petersen and Saporta 2004).…”

Section: Gender Inequality In the Executive Labor Marketmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In contrast, other work focuses on organizational demand-side barriers that prevent women's advancement to higher-level corporate positions-whether through internal (DiPrete and Soule 1988;Cohen et al 1998;Barnett et al 2000;Yap and Konrad 2009; or external labor market transitions (Brett and Stroh 1997;Lyness and Judiesch 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bending the Pipeline? Executive Search and Gender Inequality in Hiring for Top Management Jobs

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study the sources of women's underrepresentation in hiring for top management jobs, by focusing on the context of executive search. Using data that include proprietary information on 10,970 individuals considered by a search firm, we examine the sources of the low proportion of women placed in senior roles. Contrary to received wisdom, we find limited evidence that demand-side screeners strongly contribute to gender disadvantage in this setting. What gender differences exist tend to play out at the start of the hiring process and are driven both by supplyside and demand-side actors. Once considered for a position, women are no less likely than men to be hired-though they are slightly less likely to be interviewed by the search firm. Our findings highlight the theoretical importance of disentangling candidates' "self-steering" behavior from the "pipeline bending" of hiring agents. We discuss the implications of our results for understanding gender inequality at upper echelons of the labor market.

show abstract

“…This distinction is relevant for gender promotion gaps. Research suggests that women face less obstacles to promotion via the internal channel than via external hiring (Lyness & Judiesch, 1999), possibly because more information is available about the performance of internal women so that sex stereotypes become less important in the case of intra-organizational promotions. In this study the attractiveness of jobs will be measured by presenting job vacancies to participants and by measuring the likeliness that participants will apply for these vacancies, so the focus is on the external promotion channel.…”

Section: Research Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do gender differences in career aspirations contribute to sticky floors?

Deschacht

Pauw

Baert

2017

IJM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data/methods -We use original data obtained using a survey and a vignette study in which participants had to score the likeliness with which they would accept job offers with different promotion characteristics. Findings -The main findings are that female young professionals have a less pronounced preference for more demanding and less routinary jobs and that this effect is mediated by the greater risk aversion and anticipated gender discrimination among women. No gender differences were found in the relative likeliness to apply for jobs that involve a promotion in terms of job authority. Limitations -The vignette method assumes that artificial settings with low stakes do not bias results. Another limitation follows from the focus on interorganizational promotions among young professionals, which raises the question to what extent the results can be generalized to broader settings.Originality/value -This article contributes to the literature on gender differences in careers by measuring the impact of employee preferences on gender differences in career decisions.

show abstract

Are Women More Likely to Be Hired or Promoted into Management Positions?

Cited by 91 publications

References 42 publications

Does gender bias against female leaders persist? Quantitative and qualitative data from a large-scale survey

Does gender bias against female leaders persist? Quantitative and qualitative data from a large-scale survey

Bending the Pipeline? Executive Search and Gender Inequality in Hiring for Top Management Jobs

Do gender differences in career aspirations contribute to sticky floors?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About