Search results

This study aims to examine the two (and perhaps the most) important outcome variables of the interface between work and family, namely, overall job performance and parental functioning, in the context of performance appraisal.

Each of 844 respondents (managers or self-employed who supervise workers, half of them men) evaluated a briefly portrayed employed married parent on his/her job performance and parental functioning. Male and female respondents were randomly and equally allocated to one of 16 research conditions. They evaluated an employed married parent portrayed as a mother or a father, who increased or decreased his/her weekly workhours following the mother's return from maternity leave, invested relatively high or low effort in his/her work and exhibited relatively high or low work achievements.

Parents who invest a relatively high effort in their work were evaluated as having a higher level of job performance than those who invest a relatively low effort. Parents who exhibit relatively high work achievements were evaluated as having higher levels of job performance and parental functioning than those who exhibit relatively low work achievements. Parents who increased their weekly workhours following the mother's return from maternity leave were evaluated as having a lower level of parental functioning than those who decreased their weekly workhours.

This is a rare study implementing a factorial design with five independent variables (parent's time investment in work following the mother's return from maternity leave, his/her relative work effort, his/her relative work achievements, parent's gender and the evaluator’s gender) never manipulated simultaneously before.

Does gender stereotype endorsement play a role in the customer's cognitive evaluation of new ventures owned by women entrepreneurs? The authors’ cross-cultural study integrates literature on gender stereotype endorsement and cognitive legitimacy to address this research question.

The authors use a two-study experimental design and analyze our results by cultural context to test our hypotheses: one drawn from college students in Iran and one from working professionals in the United States.

The authors’ comparative results suggest that the evaluation of feminine versus masculine characteristics of women entrepreneurs varies depending on the evaluator's (in this case the customer's) endorsement of gender stereotypes and the cultural context. Specifically, the authors found that a new venture owned by a woman entrepreneur who displays feminine characteristics is perceived as more legitimate when the customer endorses feminine stereotypes, regardless of the country.

The authors’ research contributes to the literature on cognitive legitimacy and women's entrepreneurship by unveiling the cultural conditions and factors that allow women entrepreneurs to benefit from acting in a stereotypically feminine way. The authors use a binary approach to gender. Future research should extend our findings to also include a non-binary approach.

This study contributes to women's entrepreneurship research by unraveling the implications of gender stereotype endorsement, legitimacy and culture in customer evaluation of ventures owned by women.

As universities grapple with broadening participation of women in science, many ADVANCE funded institutions hone in on transforming search committee practices to better consider dual-career partners and affirmative action hires (“opportunity hires”). To date, there is a lack of empirical research on the consequences and processes underlying such a focus. The purpose of this paper is to examine whether and how two ADVANCE-recommended hiring practices, dual-career hiring and affirmative action hiring, help or hinder women’s participation in academic science.

In two experiments, the authors tested what happens to a science candidate’s evaluation and offer when that candidate reveals he or she has a dual-career partner (vs is a solo-candidate, Experiment 1) or if it is revealed that the candidate under review is the dual-hire partner or is a target of opportunity hire (vs primary candidate, Experiment 2). A random US national sample of academic scientists provided anonymous external recommendations to an ostensible faculty search committee.

Evaluators supported the job offer to a primary candidate requiring a heterosexual partner accommodation. This good news, however, was offset by the results of Experiment 2, which showed that support for the partner or affirmative action candidate depended on the evaluator’s gender. Taken together, the research identifies important personal and contextual features that sometimes do – and sometimes do not – impact hiring perceptions of women in science.

The authors believe the effects of such an emphasis on opportunity hires within ADVANCE funded institutions may be considerable and inform changes to policies and practices that help bring about gender equality.

This study aims to examine the potential effects of the gender similarity between the presenter and evaluator on the presentation evaluation scores obtained with an evaluation form.

The data were collected from marketing students at two universities in the USA. A rubric and separate survey instrument were used to capture student presentation evaluation scores and perceptions of gender differences in various aspects of presentation quality.

Findings indicate that gender of evaluators or presenters did not have any significant effect on presentation scores. The survey of student perceptions of gender effect on student presentations indicate that while female students seem to be perceived as better presenters than male students, the study found no consistent patterns of gender effect on presentation evaluations.

Only four evaluation criteria were used to measure presentation quality.

The results of this exploratory study uses the actual presentation evaluations and survey of student perceptions suggesting that student inputs can be included for grading without any concern of gender bias on grading.

Researches have already pointed out the linkage between pro-male bias and performance evaluation system. The main aim of this study is to understand how far different dimensions of performance measures are susceptible to gender stereotype.

Two separate experimental researches were designed to understand whether the performance assessment is purely based on objective criteria or it is governed by the gender stereotype. Two different performance dimensions of assessment were considered in this study as follows: interactional (behavioural) and procedural. 129 customer care managers from four metro cities of India voluntarily participated in this experimental research and played the role of performance evaluator. These managers were placed in different experimental conditions related to different combinations of gender and justice variations (interactional or procedural).

This study reveals that in violation of behaviour-based performance norm (interactional justice norm), female employees were rated less favourably than male employee both in terms of performance rating and reward recommendation by the managers, but it is not in case of procedural justice violation.

This article has experimentally proved how gender stereotype can distort the performance evaluation of behavioural dimension.

Relative performance evaluation (RPE) is a widely practiced employee appraisal process in the services industry. In a global delivery model, teams are spread across different geographical locations. The team members work on various tasks under the guidance of different managers and at times under more than one manager for performing the same task. Such complexities make RPE of the team members quite challenging. The paper proposes a methodical step-by-step approach to simplify the evaluation process without compromising on the rigour.

RPE has followed three different approaches. First is the traditional way, wherein evaluators had a common meeting to discuss and arrive at relative evaluation and ranking of members of the peer group employees. In the second, the number of evaluators and employees in a peer group were split in to 2 subgroups. The evaluators provided independent ratings and rankings. Simple mathematical tool then derived the combined ranking. In the third approach, each evaluator evaluated each employee in the peer group and provided the relative ranking for each employee. Again, mathematical tools provided the final ranking considering inputs from all evaluators. All the three evaluation approaches were analysed through an inter-rater agreement method.

All the three approaches for evaluation provided similar results giving confidence that less time-consuming methods could be adopted by evaluators without compromising on the rigour of the evaluation. The outcome of the exercise proved effective as the complaints reaching the ombudsmen reduced as compared to the earlier years. Considerable evaluation time was also saved. The study described in this paper is carried out in a non-unionized, Indian private sector services firm. Its effectiveness in other set ups is yet to be tested.

The research is carried out in the Indian Engineering services firm operating in the Knowledge based sector. Though study results are encouraging, the adaptability of methodology across different sectors and geographies is yet to be tested. More broad based studies are needed to evaluate suitability across firms and regions.

Relative evaluation exercise is challenging for evaluators. Although openness in evaluation is desired, it also makes evaluators uncomfortable in appearing to be taking sides or being opposing a candidate's ranking. The proposed approach brings in anonymity to each evaluator without scarifying individual evaluation.

The proposed methodology can be deployed across different services industries as the proposed methodology is business domain agnostic. It can be easily ported and tailored to align with an individual organization's evaluation philosophy. The suitability and effectiveness of the method can be studied under various types of firms like manufacturing, private, public, NGO, labour oriented, etc. As the proposed method reduces efforts, the stake holders can focus on understanding the relation between employee performance measurement, employee engagement, and long-term outcomes related to employee performance evaluation.

The proposed employee evaluation method leverages inter-rater reliability and agreement tool as a consensus approach to the relative performance ranking exercise. Such an approach to relative performance ranking is original as no prior studies with such an approach are found in the existing Literature.

The recent rise in online knowledge repositories and use of formalism for structuring knowledge, such as ontologies, has provided necessary conditions for the emergence of tools for generating knowledge assessment. These tools can be used in a context of interactive computer-assisted assessment (CAA) to provide a cost-effective solution for prompt feedback and increased learner’s engagement. The purpose of this paper is to describe and evaluate a tool developed by the authors, which generates test questions from an arbitrary domain ontology, based on sound pedagogical principles encapsulated in Bloom’s taxonomy.

This paper uses design science as a framework for presenting the research. A total of 5,230 questions were generated from 90 different ontologies and 81 randomly selected questions were evaluated by 8 CAA experts. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and Kruskal–Wallis test for non-parametric analysis of variance.

In total, 69 per cent of generated questions were found to be useable for tests and 33 per cent to be of medium to high difficulty. Significant differences in quality of generated questions were found across different ontologies, strategies for generating distractors and Bloom’s question levels: the questions testing application of knowledge and the questions using semantic strategies were perceived to be of the highest quality.

The paper extends the current work in the area of automated test generation in three important directions: it introduces an open-source, web-based tool available to other researchers for experimentation purposes; it recommends practical guidelines for development of similar tools; and it proposes a set of criteria and standard format for future evaluation of similar systems.

This research aims to investigate the differences in evaluations of job performance between male and female managers by those managers’ immediate bosses and peers.

Drawing on gender structure theory, along with ideas about status characteristics, the authors use hierarchical regression to test the hypotheses that male and female bosses and peers deferentially evaluate the male and female manager’s global job performance. The authors hypothesize significant two-way interactions (gender of the manager by gender of evaluator) in predicting a manager’s job performance.

The results suggest that while male peers rate female managers’ job performance significantly lower than that of male managers, female peers do not discriminate between genders in their performance evaluations. Also, managers’ bosses were found not to discriminate between genders of their subordinates.

The limitations of this study have to do primarily with the data. While the data are rich on some dimensions, they are weak on others, especially with regard to the detail about the jobs the respondents did, detailed level of familiarity with the evaluated managers, as well as racial background. The data also do not provide information on the different facets of job performance, the evaluation of which could potentially be impacted by managerial gender; this study is focused exclusively on global job performance.

The authors discuss various theoretical explanations of this pattern of results, as well as its possible influence on female managers’ careers. Although the effect size of the negative bias that male peers exhibit toward female managers is relatively small, it may be argued that lower performance assessments can accumulate over years in multiple job evaluations, negatively affecting the career of female leaders.

The evaluations supplied by different organizational members gain importance with the increased use of 360-degree feedback instruments not just for developmental but also for the job performance appraisal purposes. While the job evaluations of managers’ bosses have been investigated in the past with regard to the possible gender bias, this study provides the first known to the authors’, evidence. Also, this study points to a direct bias in performance assessments, rather than a potentially more subtle, non-performance-based bias that affects the disparities in wages and promotions of female managers. Thus, this study helps to fill a significant gap in the literature on organizations and it may have practical implications for the advancement of female managers. In addition to this contribution, this study also provides data that may be useful in resolving the ongoing debate whether female bosses act more as cogs in the machine or as change agents in organizations.

A major difficulty in controlling sexual harassment is that it is actually a perceptual phenomenon. A survey was created to determine what effects a perpetrator’s gender and management status and evaluator’s education have on whether fifteen behaviors are perceived as sexual harassment. Responses indicated a strong negative bias towards male superiors, while a positive bias appeared for female peers. Graduate degree subjects perceived more of the behaviors as harassing, but were much less biased than subjects with only undergraduate degrees. Sexual harassment is a critical concern for today’s managers. Although believed to be grossly under reported,the number of harassment complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) increased 71 percent during 1991 alone, and this trend is expected to continue (Kleiman 1992). In fact, where the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination and harassment on the basis of gender, allowed relief only in the form of specific performance (such as reinstatement), the Civil Rights Act of 1991 allows for compensatory and punitive damages (Patterson 1993). The effect of this modification is to greatly increase the financial liability of employer wrong doers for harassment. The issue’s depth is staggering in that 42.5 percent of all U.S.working women and 12.5 percent of the working men feel they have been sexually harassed on the job (Bradshaw 1987) Niven 1992). While sexual harassment is not actually perpetrated by the organization, the EEOC holds the employer responsible for its prevention, and courts consequently hold the employer liable for its occurrence where the employer knew, or should have known, about the harassment (Ellison v. Brady 1991).

Existing entrepreneurship literature has provided mixed evidence as to whether resource providers discriminate against female-led innovative start-up ventures in their resource commitment decisions either in terms of the likelihood or conditions of resource provision. While some studies revealed evidence indicative of negative discrimination against female entrepreneurs, others have provided evidence suggestive of positive discrimination. In light of these divergent findings, the purpose of this paper is to develop a more nuanced and integrative approach to studying gender biases in entrepreneurial resource provision with greater attention paid to both moderating contingency factors and mediating mechanisms.

The authors develop a conceptual model and empirically testable propositions describing whether, how and when entrepreneurial resource providers are likely to under-, over- and equivalue female-led innovative start-up ventures relative to equivalent male-led start-up ventures. The model applies not only to institutional or private investors as providers of financial capital to start-up ventures as discussed extensively in extant entrepreneurship literature but also to prospective employees as providers of human capital and prospective consumers as providers of money in exchange for an entrepreneurial product or service. The authors discuss the gender-typing of the entrepreneur's core product/service offering as a key contingency factor likely to moderate the proposed relation. The authors further delineate the importance of what they refer to as the “first”- and “second-order” mediating mechanisms underlying the hypothesized relation between resource provider evaluations of the male versus female founder-CEO, the attractiveness of his/her start-up venture and the (conditions of) resource provision to their start-ups.

Building on social-psychological theories of descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotypes and extant entrepreneurship literature, the authors establish that gender biases are likely to occur because of resource providers' perceptions of women entrepreneurs at the helm of male-typed start-up ventures to be less competent and agentic, as well as less warm and other-oriented than equivalent male entrepreneurs leading male-typed start-up ventures. The authors discuss the implications of such gender-biased evaluations for the application of stricter performance standards to female-led-male-typed start-up ventures and the likelihood and conditions of resource provision to their companies. The authors further discuss why and when female founder-CEOs of a female-typed (gender-neutral) start-up venture are likely to be overvalued (equivalued) compared to equivalent male founder-CEOs. The authors also develop propositions on additional contingency factors and mediators of the gendered evaluations of founder-CEOs and their start-up ventures, including resource providers' “second-order” gender beliefs, the high-cost versus low-cost resource commitment, individual differences in gender stereotyping and the perceived entrepreneurial commitment of the founder-CEO. The authors conclude by suggesting some practical implications for how to mitigate gender biases and discrimination by prospective resource providers.

Discussing the implications of descriptive and prescriptive gender stereotypes on evaluative decisions of entrepreneurial resources providers, this study advances not only the women's entrepreneurship literature but also the more-established scholarship on the role of gender stereotypes for women's advancement opportunities in the corporate world that has traditionally viewed entrepreneurship as the solution for women fleeing the gender-stereotype-based discrimination in the corporate setting to advance their careers.