12
(Fiske and Stevens 1993; Jost and Kay 2005; Eagly and Johannesen-Schmidt 2001), and women are
viewed as “not assertive enough”, or “too much emotional”, or “not enough agentic” to fill
leadership positions (Eagly and Karau 2002), resulting in a “think manager-think male” stereotype
or “glass ceiling” that excludes many women from apical jobs and hampers the optimal movement
of talent between organizational ranks.13
There is a growing empirical literature showing that because of stereotypes, an identical
performance is assessed differently for men and women14. Consequently, imprecise knowledge
about the productivity of young women or their career preferences may lead to systematic
underestimation of the productivity of this group.
Olian, Schwab and Haberfeld (1988) present a meta-analysis of 19 studies conducted on 1,842
individuals assessing the applications for recruitment represented by an identical curriculum
attributed to either a man or a woman. The results show that the positive responses (recruitment)
were directed more often to men.
Dobbins, Cardy and Truxillo (1988) show that individuals who evidenced traditional stereotypes
about women appraised women’s true performance less accurately than those who did not express
traditional stereotypes.
Correll, Benard and Paik (2007) analyze applications for a job sent through an identical curriculum
by two groups of individuals (mothers and non-mothers). The evaluators found the mothers less
competent and less suitable for recruitment and promotions, and offered them lower wages than
non-mothers.
Kobrynowicz and Biernat (1997) document the assessment of skills contained in an identical
curriculum presented alternately with a female name or a male name in the selection for a
management role (typically considered masculine in the stereotype).
The same skills were evaluated twice if attributed to a man instead of a woman.
Sackett, DuBois and Noe (1991) show that women were systematically rated as performing less
well than men even after controlling for ability and experience, and that the gender discrepancy in
evaluations was greater in male gender-typed jobs.
Due to statistical discrimination mechanisms, sex role stereotypes may have had negative effects on
the compensation and careers of all women. According to Coate and Loury (1993), statistical
discrimination against women gives employers an incentive to offer women jobs with a lower level
13 Schein (2001) demonstrated that around the globe, the role of manager is viewed as more closely aligned with
the characteristics ascribed to men than women: this was the case in China, Germany, Japan, and the United
Kingdom. Because of the perceived lack of fit between what women are like and the traits presumed to be
necessary for success at many of the most prestigious jobs and occupations, women are viewed less favorably than
their male colleagues.
14 - See, for example, Cole et al. (2004).