It’s More Than the Wage Gap

Gaps in wages, gaps in leadership
We’ve all heard the numbers — women consistently earn less than men for doing the same work. According to a 2015 Pew Research Center study, part-time and full-time women in the United States earned 83% of what men earned, which translates to 44 additional days of work per year to earn the same income (1). Census Bureau data from the same time period focusing only on full-time employees suggests an even larger wage gap, with women earning only 80% of what men earned in 2015 (2).

It’s hard to say where or when it all begins, but unfortunately, data indicate that it’s much earlier than you’d think. Recent research has shown that children (both boys and girls) as young as 6 years of age believe that men are smarter than women(3). This perception is also likely to have a lasting impact, even influencing young girls’ decisions to pursue studies in the sciences, like physics. Once women are ready to join the workforce, they’re more likely to face gender bias — for instance, during the application process or while seeking venture capital funding in an entrepreneurial role (4,5).
But what happens once women get their foot in the door? Even after they’re “in” women are consistently underrepresented in leadership positions:
- Women account for 48% of the private-sector workforce, however only 4% of S&P 1500 company CEOs are women (and only 16% of board members are women) (6).
- In 2017 Only 19.4% of congressional seats were held by women (7).
There are many factors that could impact the gender discrepancy in leadership positions. For instance, some theories point to the fact that women self-select into education paths and careers that pay less. However, there is no doubt that gender stereotypes and unconscious bias create a uniquely challenging environment for women who are in leadership positions or looking to grow into a leadership role. This disconnect between societal perceptions associated with “female characteristics” versus “leadership characteristics” is referred to as the Double Bind Dilemma.
Double Bind Dilemmas
Polarizing Perceptions and Role Congruity
Extensive research has shown that women are typically associated with communal traits which convey compassion for others, such as being helpful, kind, friendly, and sympathetic. On the other hand, men are typically associated with agentic traits which demonstrate assertion and control, including being aggressive, dominant, self-confident, and individualistic (8). Unfortunately for women (and perhaps not surprisingly), people also associate these “male” agentic traits with effective leadership, while more “feminine” traits are seen as less essential to leadership (9).

Role congruity theory suggests that any group is more likely to be seen in a positive light when its characteristics align to typical social roles. Based on this theory, and the discrepancies that exist between female gender stereotypes and leadership traits, women have an uphill battle. Women who act in ways that are seen to be consistent with gender stereotypes — for instance, expressing concern for others’ feelings or perspectives — are less likely to be seen as competent leaders. On the flip-side, women who display more typical leadership behaviors, like acting assertively, are often viewed as too difficult (11–12).
The High Competence Threshold
Perhaps because they’re often seen as “out of place” in their leadership roles, women are expected to meet higher standards of competence when compared to male counterparts. It’s important to note that these expectations come from both men AND women in the workplace (12).
Often times, internal competence thresholds are the most impactful. For instance, women will apply for a promotion only when they’ve met 100% of the qualifications for the role while men will apply when meeting only 60%. Additionally, in situations where men and women performed equally, men overestimated their abilities and performance while women underestimated both (13).
Further complicating the situation for women — leaders are more severely judged when they are seen as making mistakes in the “wrong” gender territory. This means women who might be perceived as out of place in their leadership role are less likely to be forgiven for an error or poor decision when compared with men. Because women are seen as more ethical than men, any actions that are perceived as unethical are likely to face increased criticism (14, 15).
Competent or Well Liked?
Another unique challenge faced by women alone — women in leadership roles struggle to be perceived as both competent and likable. Those who display strong leadership traits, the same agentic traits associated with men, are consistently viewed more negatively.
Although these traits may positively impact perceptions around competence, they receive more negative evaluations when it comes to interpersonal skills — often viewed as “competent but cold” (12, 16). In fact, research has shown that when male and female managers in leadership roles are described in identical terms as being ambitious, the individual was less likable when this person was a woman (17).
While men and women are liked equally when acting in a participatory or heavily collaborative manner, women leaders are disliked much more when acting authoritatively (18).
In political settings, voting preferences were negatively impacted for women who were seen as power-seeking (regardless of if those intentions were actual or perceived) while men displaying the same intentions were unaffected (19).
Life isn’t fair — but you can do something about it

So are we here because men are always superior leaders? There’s no evidence to suggest that. In fact, one meta-analysis suggests that women’s leadership styles may actually be more effective.
The analysis found that women are more likely to be transformational leaders, establishing themselves as role models by gaining their followers’ trust and confidence, while men were more likely to be be transactional leaders, establishing a give-and-take relationship with subordinates (The authors found that men were also more likely to take on a “non-leadership laissez-faire style” to their management roles). Interestingly, most leadership research has found that the transformational approach, combined with rewards and incentives from the transactional approach, is most effective in the modern workplace (20). This does not prove that women are always better leaders. However, it certainly disproves any beliefs that men are inherently more competent.
While there is no simple solution to address these issues, all hope is not lost. Recent research indicates that some social perceptions around feminine and masculine roles may be shifting to more neutral territory (21). Additionally, there are some strategies that can help address conscious and unconscious gender bias.
Role Switching
Research from Stanford University has shown that women who can effectively display both leadership characteristics (appearing self-confident and assertive) and communal characteristics (acting in a friendly and collaborative manner) were more likely to get promotions when compared to men or other women. These women essentially knew how to turn traits on or off depending on the social environment (22). Note that the concept of role switching may not come naturally to everyone and appearing to be disingenuous is likely to be more harmful. While the increased burden on women certainly isn’t fair, this is one of several tactics that can help address gender bias.
Reduce subjectivity in performance evaluations
Based on the evidence suggesting that women’s performance may face higher subjective standards when compared to their male counterparts (even when it comes to self-evaluations!), focus on utilizing performance criteria that is as explicit as possible to minimize bias (23).
Harness your inner critic
Your inner critic can cause you to second guess your accomplishments, skills, or competencies…. but it can also help you succeed. The key is to maintain a balanced relationship with your inner critic (easier said than done, of course) — utilizing it to identify legitimate areas of growth and improve performance, without allowing it to encourage self-doubt (24).
Increase awareness
No single individual is going to solve the unique challenge faced by female leaders, and we’re certainly not going to change societal perceptions overnight. However, the more we increase awareness regarding conscious and unconscious bias impacting the behaviors of both men and women, the more likely we are to eventually level the playing field (25).
Lead by example
Actions always speak louder than words, but changing behavior — especially our own — is hard! Regardless of how small the initial baby steps we take are, there’s no doubt that these small improvements will lead to greater impact over time. Think about how you evaluate yourself (it doesn’t matter if you’re a man or a woman) and others, and identify where there’s room for unconscious bias to creep in.
“I love to see a young girl go out and grab the world by the lapels. Life’s a bitch. You’ve got to go out and kick ass.” — Maya Angelou
Special thanks to Kristine Zerkowski for her brilliant editing
References
- http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/04/03/gender-pay-gap-facts/#comments
- https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/p60-256.pdf
- https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/jan/26/girls-believe-brilliance-is-a-male-trait-research-into-gender-stereotypes-shows
- http://www.pnas.org/content/109/41/16474.abstract
- https://hbr.org/2017/05/we-recorded-vcs-conversations-and-analyzed-how-differently-they-talk-about-female-entrepreneurs
- https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/0779dc2f-4a4e-4386-b847-9ae919735acc/gender-pay-inequality----us-congress-joint-economic-committee.pdf
- http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/women-us-congress-2017
- https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Linda_Carli/publication/5957753_Women_and_the_labyrinth_of_leadership/links/0046351eeab13a8f9b000000.pdf
- http://www.catalyst.org/system/files/Women_Take_Care_Men_Take_Charge_Stereotyping_of_U.S._Business_Leaders_Exposed.pdf
- David Schneider, The Psychology of Stereotyping (New York: Guilford Press, 2005).
- http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~search1/pdf/Eagley_Role_Conguity_Theory.pdf
- http://www.catalyst.org/system/files/The_Double_Bind_Dilemma_for_Women_in_Leadership_Damned_if_You_Do_Doomed_if_You_Dont.pdf
- https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/05/the-confidence-gap/359815/
- https://hbr.org/2016/04/research-we-are-way-harder-on-female-leaders-who-make-bad-calls
- http://www.npr.org/2016/06/02/480487259/women-held-to-higher-ethical-standard-than-men-study-shows
- Fine, C. (2010) Delusions of Gender, New York: W.W. Norton & Company. (56)
- http://www.npr.org/2016/10/18/498309357/too-sweet-or-too-shrill-the-double-bind-for-women-and-the-labyrinth-of-leadership#comment-section
- https://hbr.org/2013/04/for-women-leaders-likability-a?referral=03759&cm_vc=rr_item_page.bottom
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20519573
- https://hbr.org/2007/09/women-and-the-labyrinth-of-leadership#comment-section
- https://www.simmons.edu/~/media/Simmons/About/CGO/Documents/INsights/Insights-41.ashx?la=en
- https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/researchers-how-women-can-succeed-workplace
- https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Linda_Carli/publication/5957753_Women_and_the_labyrinth_of_leadership/links/0046351eeab13a8f9b000000.pdf
- https://hbr.org/2010/01/how-to-quiet-your-inner-critic
- https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Linda_Carli/publication/5957753_Women_and_the_labyrinth_of_leadership/links/0046351eeab13a8f9b000000.pdf
