Women as leaders: Performance evaluation as a function of method of leader selection

Abstract

In an experiment exploring the relationship between equity and evaluation of female leaders, male subjects and female confederates worked on a task in which the confederate was appointed leader over the subject. The confederate was made leader either arbitrarily (by virtue of her sex), by chance, or by her superior performance on a pre-task. It was arranged for half the dyads to succeed at the task and for the other half to fail. It was found that the more equitable the method of leader selection, the more favorably the confederate's performance was evaluated, regardless of whether the dyad succeeded or failed, and the more credit (less blame) she received when the dyad succeeded (failed). Parallels to organizational settings and affirmative action programs are discussed.