Her Opportunity
The Equality Policy Paradox: Gender Differences in How Managers Implement Gender Equality-Related Policies
Vanessa Conzon
Administrative Science Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
Drawing on data from an ethnographic study of the introduction and implementation of a flexible work policy intended in part to improve gender equality at a STEM professional organization, I develop grounded theory on how managers' gender shapes their implementation of such initiatives. I identify an equality policy paradox in which women managers, who openly support gender equality, are more likely than men managers to limit the policy. This apparent contradiction between intentions and actions is reconciled through an interactional role-based mechanism. Specifically, in this setting women managers encounter barriers to developing technical expertise, client relations, and respected authority. They respond by engaging extensively with subordinates, which allows them to effectively manage by brokering information (as an alternative to technical and client-facing tasks) and cultivating cooperation (as an alternative to formal authority). The policy undermines these interdependent activities; reflecting this, women managers generally oppose it. Men managers tend not to experience these constraints, and they focus on technical and client-related tasks that are largely independent of subordinates. The policy maintains these activities; reflecting this, they implement it. By identifying the equality policy paradox and the mechanism underlying it, this study advances theory on managers' implementation of equality-related practices and policies as well as theory on gender and management.
Networking Frictions in Venture Capital, and the Gender Gap in Entrepreneurship
Sabrina Howell & Ramana Nanda
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, forthcoming
Abstract:
We find that male participants in Harvard Business School's New Venture Competition who were randomly exposed to more VC investors on their panel were substantially more likely to start a VC-backed startup post-graduation, indicating that access to investors impacts fundraising independent of the quality of ideas. However, female participants experience no benefit from exposure to male or female VCs, which appears related to a reduced propensity to reach out to VCs to whom they were exposed. Our results therefore also demonstrate gender-based differences in the degree to which increased exposure to investors can address networking frictions in venture capital.
When Sarah Meets Lawrence: The Effects of Coeducation on Women's College Major Choices
Avery Calkins et al.
American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, July 2023, Pages 1-34
Abstract:
We leverage variation in the adoption of coeducation by US women's colleges to study how exposure to a mixed-gender collegiate environment affects women's human capital investments. Our event-study analyses of newly collected historical data find a 3.0-3.5 percentage point (30-33 percent) decline in the share of women majoring in STEM fields. While coeducation caused a large influx of male peers and a modest increase in male faculty, we find no evidence that it altered the composition of the female student body or other gender-neutral inputs. Extrapolation of our main estimate suggests that coeducational environments explain 36 percent of the current gender gap in STEM majors.
Composing Meaningful Lives: Exceptional Women and Men at Age 50
David Lubinski et al.
Gifted Child Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
To understand divergent and remarkable lives lived, we examined the accomplishments, family dynamics, life orientation, psychological well-being, and definition of a meaningful life among two exceptional groups at age 50: Top Science, Technology, Engineering, & Mathematics (STEM) doctoral students (270 males, 255 females, originally surveyed in their mid-20s) and profoundly gifted adolescents (263 males, 71 females, top 0.01% in ability, first studied at age 12). The creativity and occupational stature of both cohorts were extraordinary and commensurate. Life priorities, time allocation, and breadth of interests created paths that differed for women and men, resulting in contrasting, but equally exceptional, life outcomes across career, life, and relationship satisfaction. Distinct constellations of personal attributes of intellectually and scientifically brilliant women, relative to such men, operated to form satisfying and productive lives that differed for the women and men as a whole. Findings cast light on the participation of women and men in STEM and conceptually demanding leadership positions.
Gender-Based Differences in Language Used by Students to Describe Their Noteworthy Characteristics in Medical Student Performance Evaluations
Eden Engel-Rebitzer, Jennfier Kogan & Janae
Heath Academic Medicine, July 2023, Pages 844-850
Purpose: The noteworthy characteristic (NC) section of the medical student performance evaluation (MSPE) was introduced to facilitate holistic review of residency applications and mitigate biases. The student-written aspect of the characteristics, however, may introduce biases resulting from gender differences in self-promotion behaviors. The authors conducted an exploratory analysis of potential gender-based differences in language used in NCs.
Method: The authors performed a single-center cohort analysis of all student-written NCs at the Perelman School of Medicine (2018-2022). NCs were converted into single words and characterized into word categories: ability (e.g., "talent"), standout ("best"), grindstone ("meticulous"), communal ("caring"), or agentic ("ambitious"). The authors qualitatively analyzed NC topic characteristics (i.e., focused on scholarship, community service). Logistic regression was used to identify gender differences in word categories and topics used in NCs.
Results: The cohort included 2,084 characteristics from 783 MSPEs (47.5%, n = 371 written by women). After adjusting for underrepresented in medicine status, honor society membership, and intended specialty, men were more likely to use standout (OR = 2.00; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.35, 2.96; P = .001) and communal (OR = 1.40; 95% CI = 1.03, 1.90; P = .03) words in their NCs compared with women but less likely to use grindstone words (OR = 0.72; 95% CI = 0.53, 0.98; P = .04). Men were more likely than women to discuss scholarship (OR = 2.03; 95% CI = 1.27, 3.23; P = .003), hobbies (OR = 1.45; 95% CI = 1.07, 1.96; P = .02), and/or awards (OR = 1.59; 95% CI = 1.16, 2.16; P = .004) and less likely to highlight community service (OR = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.48, 0.92; P = .02).
Field-Specific Ability Beliefs as an Explanation for Gender Differences in Academics' Career Trajectories: Evidence From Public Profiles on ORCID.org
Aniko Hannak et al.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Academic fields exhibit substantial levels of gender segregation. Here, we investigated differences in field-specific ability beliefs (FABs) as an explanation for this phenomenon. FABs may contribute to gender segregation to the extent that they portray success as depending on "brilliance" (i.e., exceptional intellectual ability), which is a trait culturally associated with men more than women. Although prior work has documented a relation between academic fields' FABs and their gender composition, it is still unclear what the underlying dynamics are that give rise to gender imbalances across academia as a function of FABs. To provide insight into this issue, we custom-built a new data set by combining information from the author-tracking service Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) with information from a survey of U.S. academics across 30 fields. Using this expansive longitudinal data set (Ns = 86,879-364,355), we found that women were underrepresented among those who enter fields with brilliance-oriented FABs and overrepresented among those who exit these fields. We also found that FABs' association with women's transitions across academic fields was substantially stronger than their association with men's transitions. With respect to mechanisms, FABs' association with gender segregation was partially explained by the fact that women encounter more prejudice in fields with brilliance-oriented FABs. With its focus on the dynamic patterns shaping segregation and its broad scope in terms of geography, career stage, and historical time, this research makes an important contribution toward understanding the factors driving gender segregation in academia.
Motherhood, Fatherhood, and the Gender Gap in Occupational Authority
Rebecca Glauber
Sociological Forum, forthcoming
Abstract:
Does motherhood diminish women's occupational authority and widen the gender gap among contemporary workers in the U.S.? The current study answers this question using data from the Occupational Information Network and 15 waves of panel data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (2002-2019). Fixed effects' regressions show that married and unmarried mothers are less likely than their childless peers to have occupational authority. The motherhood penalty is larger for women with two or more children than one child. Men fare differently, as fatherhood is associated with a small increase in married men's likelihood of working in occupations with authority. Fixed effects regressions with individual slopes show that this association for men is not causal. Instead, married men may have additional children in response to an increase in their occupational authority. All told, parenthood widens the gender gap in authority. This study builds on theories of gendered families and gendered organizations to argue that mothers are systematically underrepresented in occupations with high levels of authority. Because people with authority make hiring, promotion, pay, and policy decisions, the underrepresentation of mothers may perpetuate other forms of labor market inequalities.
The Gendered Liability of Venture Novelty
Zhenyu Liao et al.
Academy of Management Journal, forthcoming
Abstract:
To hedge unforeseen risk, investors may seek to fund male-led ventures that they anticipate most other investors will prefer, arriving at decisions biased against women. Yet, little is known about how investors infer such gendered preferences and when they are particularly likely to do so. Integrating insights from third-party bias research with social role theory, we posit that when women propose novel ventures, investors are more apt to make unpromising social approval forecasting -- an anticipation of the extent to which other investors will endorse these ventures -- and thus withhold funding support. This is because the intensified gender role violations due to women being entrepreneurial in tandem with being novel lead investors to impose harsher judgments that these ventures violate normative business practices. Our hypotheses received support from results of three methodologically complementary studies, including an archival study of Shark Tank (2009-2019) coupled with preregistered online and field experiments. By casting light on how venture novelty, a key determining factor of entrepreneurial success, makes third-party bias against women particularly salient, our work identifies a less overt "entrepreneurial gender dilemma" and derives new insights into policy making designed to help women entrepreneurs surmount financial and social barriers in the innovation-based economy.
Gender-Performance Relation in Competitive But Supportive Work Environments: Evidence From Wall Street
Vidhi Chhaochharia, Alok Kumar & Shiyi Zhang
University of Miami Working Paper, June 2023
Abstract:
This study examines whether supportive work environments can reduce or eliminate gender-based performance differences even in highly competitive Wall Street careers. Using a large sample of over 1.5 million forecasts issued by more than 9,000 sell-side equity analysts spanning more than two decades, we find that female equity analysts exhibit superior forecasting performance when they operate in women-friendly work environments: They issue more accurate, bolder, and timelier forecasts. The forecasting performance of female analysts exhibits further improvement when the local environment is more favorable to women, as evidenced by friendlier abortion laws, lower degree of sexism, and fewer per-capita sexual harassment cases. Exploiting analyst moves across brokerages, we demonstrate that improvements in supportive environment generate improvements in forecast accuracy and timeliness.
Setting Gendered Expectations? Recruiter Outreach Bias in Online Tech Training Programs
Jacqueline Lane, Karim Lakhani & Roberto Fernandez
Organization Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Competence development in digital technologies, analytics, and artificial intelligence is increasingly important to all types of organizations and their workforce. Universities and corporations are investing heavily in developing training programs, at all tenure levels, to meet the new skills needs. However, there is a risk that the new set of lucrative opportunities for employees in these tech-heavy fields will be biased against diverse demographic groups like women. Although much research has examined the experiences of women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields and occupations, less understood is the extent to which gender stereotypes influence recruiters' perceptions and evaluations of individuals who are deciding whether to apply to STEM training programs. These behaviors are typically unobserved because they occur prior to the application interface. We address this question by investigating recruiters' initial outreach decisions to more than 166,000 prospective students who have expressed interest in applying to a midcareer level online tech training program in business analytics. Using data on the recruiters' communications, our results indicate that recruiters are less likely to initiate contact with female than male prospects and search for additional signals of quality from female prospects before contacting them. We also find evidence that recruiters are more likely to base initial outreach activities on prospect gender when they have higher workloads and limited attention. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of this research for our understanding of how screening and selection decisions prior to the application interface may undermine organizational efforts to achieve gender equality and diversity as well as the potential for demand-side interventions to mitigate these gender disparities.
Regulating Gender Diversity: Evidence from California Senate Bill 826
Abigail Allen & Aida Sijamic Wahid
Management Science, forthcoming
Abstract:
Do gender diversity quotas enhance firm value? This broad question has sparked significant debate because, whereas diversity is generally thought to improve board functioning, prior research in international settings suggests mandating diversity may have adverse consequences if it moves firms away from market equilibrium. Exploiting the political events leading up to the passage of California Senate Bill (SB) 826 as an exogenous shock to assess the market implications of board gender composition, we document either significantly positive or insignificant two-day abnormal returns for California firms across a variety of model specifications. Importantly, this finding contradicts the strong claims of contemporary studies of SB 826 that the California mandate was value-destructive. We reconcile these findings by providing critical evidence that contemporaneous results lack robustness to alternative model specifications and provide an incomplete picture by failing to comprehensively examine a broader set of event dates or account for mixed messaging on the final event date. We also provide some evidence of significant negative abnormal returns to litigation milestones that threaten to overturn SB 826 with the magnitude increasing in the size of board gender deficits. Finally, we provide evidence that there is no observable decline in newly appointed female director quality following the implementation of SB 826 relative to either preregulation or male director appointments. Collectively, our results suggest nonnegative (if not positive) consequences to California firms arising from SB 826 and directly counter assertions that mandated gender diversity is detrimental to firm value.
Gender and Managerial Job Mobility: Career Prospects for Executives Displaced by Acquisitions
Xiaohu Guo et al.
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, forthcoming
Abstract:
We investigate how men and women fare in the managerial labor market in the plausibly exogenous circumstance of their firms being acquired, when most target-firm managers (about 90%) are displaced. These career disruptions result in a larger drop in rank and compensation for female managers, despite similar job-search attributes. Gender differences are mitigated when hiring firms have more women in upper-echelon positions. Rich managerial experience and external board service also reduce gender related differences. Overall, results point to a (implicit) "gender-penalty" in terms of managerial job mobility, but also indicate contexts in which penalty is alleviated, and even reversed.