Search results

This chapter examines the tension between interdependence and dominance. First, we briefly review prominent social psychological theories regarding the development and maintenance of status systems. Next we briefly describe how these structures help distribute social power in modern society. We then examine how prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination stem from status systems and interdependence, using the Stereotype Content Model (Fiske, Xu, Cuddy & Glick, 1999; Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002). Next, we consider the unique circumstances of gender relations and how they give way to complementary justifications of gender inequality, using Ambivalent Sexism Theory (Glick & Fiske, 1996, 1999, 2001a, 2001b). Last, we review evidence to support our argument that women do not necessarily acquiesce joyfully to the present hierarchical arrangement, but rather guide their choices by their pragmatic alternatives, as dictated by benevolent and hostile ideologies.

Research has found that stereotypes affect occupational choices, but there has been almost no research on how they specifically affect the choice of becoming an entrepreneur. This study bridges different fields of research by combining theories on entrepreneurial intent, self-esteem, and stereotypes. The author argues that in situations of insufficient information individuals assess prospective careers in commercial and social entrepreneurship by means of stereotypes, and the author is the first to explore the influence of commercial and social entrepreneurial stereotypes on an individual’s intention to start a commercial (for-profit) or social (not for-profit) venture. The author uses the framework outlined by the stereotype content model to disclose the existence of distinct stereotypes for commercial and social entrepreneurs exist and, thereafter, the author analyzes the influences of both entrepreneurial stereotypes on the specific startup intentions. The author test the hypotheses with unique survey data from a sample of German non-entrepreneurs which reveals that commercial entrepreneurs are seen as competent but cold, whereas social entrepreneurs are regarded as warm but incompetent. Using structural equation modeling and multi-group analysis, the data implies that higher levels of perceived warmth and competence of commercial entrepreneurs have a positive indirect effect on commercial startup intentions. No such effect was found for social startup intentions; however, the results indicate that a higher societal status of social entrepreneurs exerts a positive indirect impact on the intention to start a social business. The author discusses the practical implications of our approach and point out avenues for future research.

We examine how authorities' use of fair decision-making procedures and power benevolently shape workers' impressions of them as competent and warm, which serve as a mechanism whereby authorities' behaviors shape workers' emotional responses. We investigate how the role of these impressions differs depending on authority gender and consider whether emotional responses differ for male and female subordinates.

We conducted a between-subjects experimental vignette study in which we manipulate an authority's behaviors and gender. We use multigroup mediation analysis to test our predictions.

Authorities who employ procedural justice and benevolent power elicit reports of heightened positive emotion experiences and intended displays and reports of reduced negative emotion experiences and intended displays. These behaviors also enhance views of authorities as competent and warm. The mediating role of impressions differs by authority gender. Authority behaviors prompt reports of positive emotions through conveying impressions that align with authorities' gender stereotypes (competence for men, warmth for women). In contrast, warmth impressions mediate effects of behaviors on reported negative emotions when authorities are men, whereas when authorities are women, benevolent power use directly reduces reported negative experience, and procedural justice reduces negative display. Female respondents are more likely to report positive emotion experience and display toward male authorities and negative display toward female authorities.

By examining competence and warmth impressions as mechanisms, we gain insight into how the process by which authority behaviors affect worker emotions is gendered and shed light on micro-level dynamics contributing to gender inequality at work.

The goal of this chapter is to both provide a sociological explanation for gender differences in risk-taking behavior and to explain how such gender differences in behavior may contribute to women’s underrepresentation at the top of hierarchies.

I synthesize relevant research findings from the fields of social psychology, economics, psychology, decisions science, and sociology.

I argue that risk-taking is a gendered action due to both prescriptive and descriptive gender stereotypes. The fact that risk-taking is a gendered action offers sociological insights as to why women take fewer risks than men. First, women may rationally choose to take fewer risks, given that risk-taking is less rewarding for them. Second, the aforementioned gender stereotypes may cause institutional gatekeepers to give women fewer opportunities to take risks.

Sociologists should care about this phenomenon because large rewards are attached to successful risk-taking behavior. Thus, if men as a group take more successful risks than women as a group – simply because they take more risks, and thus by chance experience more successful risks – then more men than women will experience upward mobility caused by risk-taking.

Gender differences in risk-taking behavior likely depress the upward mobility of women and are a contributing factor to the dearth of women in top positions. In this era of falling formal barriers and women’s educational gains, gender differences in risk-taking behavior are likely of increasing importance for understanding the inequalities in hierarchies in U.S. society.

Gender is at core a group process because people use it as a primary frame for coordinating behavior in interpersonal relations. The everyday use of sex/gender as cultural tool for organizing social relations spreads gendered meanings beyond sex and reproduction to all spheres of social life that are carried out through social relationships and constitutes gender as a distinct and obdurate system of inequality. Through gender's role in organizing social relations, gender inequality is rewritten into new economic and social arrangements as they emerge, contributing to the persistence of that inequality in modified form in the face of potentially leveling economic and political changes in contemporary society.

Individuals are often stigmatized by virtue of their status on various dimensions and as a consequence, they typically evoke negative cognitions, affect, and emotions among observers. In addition, they are often the targets of both access and treatment discrimination in organizations. Thus, we present a model of the cognitive, affective, and cultural influences on stigmatization in organizations, detail how stigmatization affects human resource management processes and practices, and consider strategies that can be used to reduce the problems faced by stigmatized individuals in organizations.

In this chapter, we first show how the concept of competency, and management of or by competency, can be a factor in helping more people find employment, improve employability and develop competency, thus contributing to increased diversity in the workforce at every level of an organisation. We then examine a different part of the literature, more closely related to organisational learning, which finds that deviance and diversity can potentially boost competency. Subsequently, we look at diversity management first as an organisational competency, then as an individual competency. Concerning the reasons for the spread of management by competency and diversity management, we shall see that their respective advocates employ the same rhetoric of economic rationality, with both types of practice being justified by an objective change in the environment and, for this reason, presented as unavoidable and to some extent as simply “moving with the times”. In opposition to this supposed rationality as seen by companies, we will show that, in France, the two concepts of competency and diversity interact closely with institutional processes of mimetism, normalisation and coercion. In the final section, we shall look more closely at critical views of management by competency and diversity, as the criticisms of the two concepts are very similar and question their (possible) claims to be propelling society towards a fairer society.

In this paper, we examine the effects of legitimation and delegitimation of female leaders in male- and female-dominated organizations on leader behavior toward their subordinates. Drawing upon status and legitimacy theories, we argue that delegitimation represents one event that makes gender stereotypes salient in different organizational contexts, and by this means affects leader–subordinate interaction. Gender stereotypes will be more salient in male- than in female-dominated organizations, but only when female leaders are delegitimated. Specifically, we hypothesize that deauthorized female leaders will exhibit more deferential and less directive behavior than authorized female leaders, and this effect will be stronger in male- than in female-dominated organizations. Authorized female leaders, however, will express a similar amount of deferential and directive behavior, regardless of organizational sex composition. To test these hypotheses, we created a laboratory experiment with simulated organizations. Results are mixed. Deauthorized leaders are marginally more deferential than authorized leaders, and this effect is stronger in male-dominated organizations; authorized leaders express similar amounts of deferential behavior in both types of organizations. Yet, leaders are more directive in male- than in female-dominated organizations, whether they are deauthorized or authorized. We discuss the implications of these results and future directions for this research.