Congruence Between Leadership Gender and Organizational Claims Affects the Gender Composition of the Applicant Pool: Field Experimental Evidence

References

• Abele A (2003) The dynamics of masculine-agentic and feminine-communal traits: Findings from a prospective study. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 85(4):768–776.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abraham M (2017) Pay formalization revisited: Considering the effects of manager gender and discretion on closing the gender wage gap. Acad. Management J. 60(1):29–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abraham M (2020) Gender-role incongruity and audience-based gender bias: An examination of networking among entrepreneurs. Admin. Sci. 65(1):151–180.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Avery DR, McKay PF (2006) Target practice: An organizational impression management approach to attracting minority and female job applicants. Personnel Psych. 59(1):157–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barber A (1998) Recruiting Employees: Individual and Organizational Perspectives (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Barbulescu R, Bidwell M (2013) Do women choose different jobs from men? Mechanisms of application segregation in the market for managerial workers. Organ. Sci. 24(3):737–756.Link, Google Scholar
• Barnett WP, Baron JN, Toby E. Stuart (2000) Avenues of attainment: Occupational demography and organizational careers in the California civil service. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(1):88–144.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baum M, Schäfer M, Kabst R (2016) Modeling the impact of advertisement-image congruity on applicant attraction. Human Resource Management 55(1):7–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bode C, Rogan M, Singh J (2017) Up to no good? Gender, social impact work and employee promotions, https://corporate-sustainability.org/wp-content/uploads/Bode_Up_to_No_Good.pdf.Google Scholar
• Bode C, Singh J, Rogan M (2015) Corporate social initiatives and employee retention. Organ. Sci. 26(6):1702–1720.Link, Google Scholar
• Botelho TL, Abraham M (2017) Pursuing quality: How search costs and uncertainty magnify gender-based double standards in a multistage evaluation process. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(4):698–730.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Botelho TL, Chang M (2020) The perception and evaluation of founder experience by hiring firms: A field experiment. Acad. Management Proc. 2020(1):14062.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brands RA, Fernandez-Mateo I (2017) Leaning out: How negative recruitment experiences shape women’s decisions to compete for executive roles. Admin. Sci. Quart. 62(3):405–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bromley P, Powell WW (2012) From smoke and mirrors to walking the talk: Decoupling in the contemporary world. Acad. Management Ann. 6(1):483–530.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burbano VC (2016) Social responsibility messages and worker wage requirements: Field experimental evidence from online labor marketplaces. Organ. Sci. 27(4):1010–1028.Link, Google Scholar
• Burbano VC (2020) The demotivating effects of communicating a social-political stance: Field experimental evidence from an online labor market platform. Management Sci., ePub ahead of print June 4, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3562.Google Scholar
• Campero S, Fernandez RM (2019) Gender composition of labor queues and gender disparities in hiring. Social Forces 97(4):1487–1516.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cech E, Rubineau B, Silbey S, Seron C (2011) Professional role confidence and gendered persistence in engineering. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 76(5):641–666.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen LE, Broschak JP (2013) Whose jobs are these? The impact of the proportion of female managers on the number of new management jobs filled by women vs. men. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(4):509–541.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen LE, Broschak JP, Haveman HA (1998) And then there were more? The effect of organizational sex composition on the hiring and promotion of managers. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 63(5):711–727.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen PN, Huffman ML (2003) Individuals, jobs, and labor markets: The devaluation of women’s work. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 68(3):443–463.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen PN, Huffman ML (2007) Working for the woman? Female managers and the gender wage gap. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 72(5):681–704.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cornell SJ, Ridgeway CL (2003) Expectation states theory. Delamater J, ed. Handbook of Social Psychology (Springer, Boston), 29–51.Google Scholar
• Correll SJ (2001) Gender and the career choice process: The role of biased self-assessments. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(6):1691–1730.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Correll SJ (2004) Constraints into preferences: Gender, status, and emerging career aspirations. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 69(1):93–113.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Correll SJ, Benard S (2006) Biased estimators? Comparing status and statistical theories of discrimination. Thye SR, Lawler EJ, eds. Social Psychology of the Workplace (Emerald, Bingley, UK), 89–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cotter DA, DeFiore J, Hermsen JM, Kowalewski BM, Vanneman R (1997) All women benefit: The macro-level effect of occupational integration on gender earnings equality. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 62(5):714–734.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Delmas MA, Burbano VC (2011) The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Rev. 54(1):64–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dobbin F (2011) Inventing Equal Opportunity (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ).Google Scholar
• Dobbin F, Kalev A (2017) Training programs and reporting systems won’t end sexual harassment. Promoting more women will. Harvard Business Review (November 15), https://hbr.org/2017/11/training-programs-and-reporting-systems-wont-end-sexual-harassment-promoting-more-women-will.Google Scholar
• Dobbin F, Kim S, Kalev A (2011) You can’t always get what you need: Organizational determinants of diversity programs. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 76(3):386–411.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dover TL, Major B, Kaiser CR (2016) Members of high-status groups are threatened by pro-diversity organizational messages. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 62:58–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Durcikova A, Gray P (2009) How knowledge validation processes affect knowledge contribution. J. Management Inform. Systems 25(4):81–107.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eagly AH, Karau SJ (2002) Role congruity theory of prejudice toward female leaders. Psych. Rev. 109(3):573–598.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edelman LB, Fuller SR, Mara-Drita I (2001) Diversity rhetoric and the managerialization of law. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(6):1589–1641.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edelman LB, Krieger LH, Eliason SR, Albiston CR, Mellema V (2011) When organizations rule: Judicial deference to institutionalized employment structures. Amer. J. Sociol. 117(3):888–954.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernandez RM, Friedrich C (2011) Gender sorting at the application interface. Indust. Relations J. Econom. Soc. 50(4):591–609.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernandez RM, Mors ML (2008) Competing for jobs: Labor queues and gender sorting in the hiring process. Soc. Sci. Res. 37(4):1061–1080.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernandez RM, Sosa ML (2005) Gendering the job: Networks and recruitment at a call center. Amer. J. Sociol. 111(3):859–904.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernandez-Mateo I (2009) Cumulative gender disadvantage in contract employment. Amer. J. Sociol. 114(4):871–923.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fernandez-Mateo I, Fernandez RM (2016) Bending the pipeline? Executive search and gender inequality in hiring for top management jobs. Management Sci. 62(12):3636–3655.Link, Google Scholar
• Fernandez-Mateo I, King Z (2011) Anticipatory sorting and gender segregation in temporary employment. Management Sci. 57(6):989–1008.Link, Google Scholar
• Fiske S, Stevens LE (1993) What’s so special about sex? Gender stereotyping and discrimination. Gender Issues in Contemporary Society (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA), 173–196.Google Scholar
• Gaucher D, Friesen JC, Kay A (2011) Evidence that gendered wording in job advertisements exists and sustains gender inequality. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 101(1):109–128.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gibson DE, Lawrence BS (2010) Women’s and men’s career referents: How gender composition and comparison level shape career expectations. Organ. Sci. 21(6):1159–1175.Link, Google Scholar
• Goldberg CB, Riordan C, Schaffer BS (2010) Does social identity theory underlie relational demography? A test of the moderating effects of uncertainty reduction and status enhancement on similarity effects. Human Relations 63(7):903–926.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hahl O, Ha J (2019) Committed diversification: Why authenticity insulates against penalties for diversification. Organ. Sci. 31(1):1–22.Link, Google Scholar
• Haines EL, Deaux K, Lofaro N (2016) The times they are a-changing . . . or are they not? A comparison of gender stereotypes, 1983–2014. Psych. Women Quart. 40(3):353–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hambrick DC (2007) Upper echelons theory: An update. Acad. Management Rev. 32(2):334–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME (2001) Description and prescription: How gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. J. Soc. Issues 57(4):657–674.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heilman ME (2012) Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Res. Organ. Behav. 32:113–135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Highhouse S, Thornbury EE, Little IS (2007) Social-identity functions of attraction to organizations. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 103(1):134–146.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsu G, Hannan MT (2005) Identities, genres, and organizational forms. Organ. Sci. 16(5):474–490.Link, Google Scholar
• Huffman ML, Cohen PN, Pearlman J (2010) Engendering change: Organizational dynamics and workplace gender desegregation, 1975–2005. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(2):255–277.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1992) Homophily and differential returns: Sex differences in network structure and access in an advertising firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 37(3):422–447.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ibarra H (1995) Race, opportunity, and diversity of social circles in managerial networks. Acad. Management J. 38(3):673–703.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaiser CR, Major B, Jurcevic I, Dover TL, Brady LM, Shapiro JR (2013) Presumed fair: Ironic effects of organizational diversity structures. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 104(3):504–519.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kalev A, Kelly E, Dobbin F (2006) Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 71(4):589–617.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kang SK, DeCelles KA, Tilcsik A, Jun S (2016) Whitened résumés: Race and self-presentation in the labor market. Admin. Sci. Quart. 61(3):469–502.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kesner IF (1988) Directors’ characteristics and committee membership: An investigation of type, occupation, tenure, and gender. Acad. Management J. 31(1):66–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kmec JA (2008) The process of sex segregation in a gender-typed field: The case of male nurses. Sociol. Perspect. 51(2):259–279.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee M, Huang L (2018) Gender bias, social impact framing, and evaluation of entrepreneurial ventures. Organ. Sci. 29(1):1–16.Link, Google Scholar
• Leung MD, Koppman S (2018) Taking a pass: How proportional prejudice and decisions not to hire reproduce gender segregation. Amer. J. Sociol. 124(3):762–813.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lincoln JR, Miller J (1979) Work and friendship ties in organizations: A comparative analysis of relation networks. Admin. Sci. Quart. 24(2):181–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Margolis JD, Walsh JP (2001) People and Profits? The Search for a Link Between a Company’s Social and Financial Performance, 1st ed. (Psychology Press, Mahwah, NJ).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marquis C, Lee M (2013) Who is governing whom? Executives, governance, and the structure of generosity in large U.S. firms. Strategic Management J. 34(4):483–497.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marquis C, Qian C (2013) Corporate social responsibility reporting in China: Symbol or substance? Organ. Sci. 25(1):127–148.Link, Google Scholar
• Marquis C, Tilcsik A (2013) Imprinting: Toward a multilevel theory. Acad. Management Ann. 7(1):195–245.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marquis C, Toffel MW, Zhou Y (2016) Scrutiny, norms, and selective disclosure: A global study of greenwashing. Organ. Sci. 27(2):483–504.Link, Google Scholar
• McDonald ML, Keeves GD, Westphal JD (2018) One step forward, one step back: White male top manager organizational identification and helping behavior toward other executives following the appointment of a female or racial minority CEO. Acad. Management J. 61(2):405–439.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDonnell MH, King B (2013) Keeping up appearances: Reputational threat and impression management after social movement boycotts. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(3):387–419.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGinn KL, Milkman KL (2012) Looking up and looking out: Career mobility effects of demographic similarity among professionals. Organ. Sci. 24(4):1041–1060.Link, Google Scholar
• McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM (2001) Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Rev. Sociol. 27:415–444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meyer JW, Rowan B (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Amer. J. Sociol. 83(2):340–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moss‐Racusin CA, Johnson ER (2016) Backlash against male elementary educators. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. 46(7):379–393.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perry EL, Davis-Blake A, Kulik CT (1994) Explaining gender-based selection decisions: A synthesis of contextual and cognitive approaches. Acad. Management Rev. 19(4):786–820.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petersen T, Morgan LA (1995) Separate and unequal: Occupation-establishment sex segregation and the gender wage gap. Amer. J. Sociol. 101(2):329–365.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petersen T, Saporta I (2004) The opportunity structure for discrimination. Amer. J. Sociol. 109(4):852–901.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petersen T, Saporta I, Seidel MDL (2000) Offering a job: Meritocracy and social networks. Amer. J. Sociol. 106(3):763–816.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rau BL, Hyland MM (2003) Corporate teamwork and diversity statements in college recruitment brochures: Effects on attraction. J. Appl. Soc. Psych. 33(12):2465–2492.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reskin B (1993) Sex segregation in the workplace. Annual Rev. Sociol. 19:241–270.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ridgeway CL, Bourg C (2004) Gender as status: An expectation states theory approach.Eagly AH, Beall AE, Sternberg RJ, eds. The Psychology of Gender, 2nd ed. (Guilford Press, New York), 217–241.Google Scholar
• Rudman LA, Moss-Racusin CA, Phelan JE, Nauts S (2012) Status incongruity and backlash effects: Defending the gender hierarchy motivates prejudice against female leaders. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 48(1):165–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rynes SL, Bretz RD, Gerhart B (1991) The importance of recruitment in job choice: A different way of looking. Personnel Psych. 44(3):487–521.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shea CT, Hawn OV (2019) Microfoundations of corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility. Acad. Management J. 62(5):1609–1642.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soule SA (2009) Contention and Corporate Social Responsibility (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stainback K, Tomaskovic-Devey D (2012) Documenting Desegregation: Racial and Gender Segregation in Private Sector Employment Since the Civil Rights Act (Russell Sage Foundation, New York).Google Scholar
• Sumner KE, Brown TJ (1996) Men, women, and money: Exploring the role of gender, gender-linkage of college major and career-information sources in salary expectations. Sex Roles 34(11):823–839.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutter M, Glätzle-Rützler D (2014) Gender differences in the willingness to compete emerge early in life and persist. Management Sci. 61(10):2339–2354.Link, Google Scholar
• Thomas KM, Wise PG (1999) Organizational attractiveness and individual differences: Are diverse applicants attracted by different factors? J. Bus. Psych. 13(3):375–390.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M (2009) Technology, identity, and inertia through the lens of “the digital photography company.” Organ. Sci. 20(2):441–460.Link, Google Scholar
• Turban DB, Dougherty TE (1992) Influences of campus recruiting on applicant attraction to firms. Acad. Management J. 35(4):739–765.Google Scholar
• Williams C (1992) The glass escalator: Hidden advantages for men in the “female” professions. Soc. Problems 39(3):253–267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Williams RJ (2003) Women on corporate boards of directors and their influence on corporate philanthropy. J. Bus. Ethics 42(1):1–10.Crossref, Google Scholar