Glass Cliffs or Partisan Pressure? Examining Gender and Party Leader Tenures and Exits

Abstract

This article adds to our understanding of the gendered impact of informal rules and norms for party leaders. Specifically, it examines the gendered nature of party leader tenures and exits. Using original data collected on party leader experiences in Canada, we test for the existence of gender differences in leader tenures and exits, and examine two potential explanations for any differences. We find that leader tenures and exits are indeed gendered but only within parties with the potential to form government, ones where the political stakes are highest. Within these major parties, women’s tenures as party leaders are significantly shorter than men’s and they are significantly more likely to be forced to resign from the position. We find clear evidence of the existence of the glass cliff phenomenon in major parties but unclear evidence of its role in women’s shorter tenures. Instead, women’s shorter tenures are explained by the harsher set of standards being applied to women party leaders.

Women Leaders and Pandemic Performance: A Spurious Correlation

“…The pandemic has raised women leaders’ profiles, but gendered double standards remain. Women governing during crisis face shorter tenures, harsher exits, and disproportionate blame compared with similarly situated men (O'Neill, Pruysers, and Stewart 2019; Reyes-Housholder 2019; Thomas 2018). Making women leaders into icons of coronavirus containment could heighten voters’ dissatisfaction with their performance as the pandemic lingers and even worsens.…”

Locating power in party leader selection

“…Over the last decade or so, however, this imbalance has been, to some extent, corrected. Among studies with an institutionalist orientation, some have addressed the question of which sorts of leaders get chosen in particular circumstances (Quinn, 2012; So, 2012), or the effects on party leaders of their predecessors (Horiuchi et al, 2015), or gender and party leaders (O'Neill et al, 2019). Others are concerned with how the position of leaders vis‐à‐vis their parties has shifted over time (Blondel et al, 2010; Katz & Mair, 2002; Koskimaa, 2016; Schumacher & Giger, 2017).…”

Do party primaries punish women? Revisiting the trade-off between the inclusion of party members and the selection of women as party leaders

“…In the latter, they can use partisan cues to make their election. In party primaries, all aspirants to the party candidacy provide the same party cue, so voters have to rely on other cues, of which gender stereotyping is one of the most straightforward (Fox and Oxley, 2003), and women are less likely to be seen to possess the qualities required for leadership positions (O'Neill et al, 2019).…”

“…In the latter, they can use partisan cues to make their election. In party primaries, all aspirants to the party candidacy provide the same party cue, so voters have to rely on other cues, of which gender stereotyping is one of the most straightforward (Fox and Oxley, 2003), and women are less likely to be seen to possess the qualities required for leadership positions (O’Neill et al, 2019). Coordination problems among selectors: In primaries, the decision is made by a group of decentralized, atomized and anonymous individuals where meaningful deliberation about improving the representation of some social groups is not possible.…”