Gender Bias at Work: The Glass Cliff

Gender Bias in Leadership: Why Women Leaders Face Harsher Judgments

The recent media coverage of leadership failures at AMP brings to mind a compelling study on whether gender affects how harshly leaders’ failures are judged. Published in Psychological Science, the research reveals that leaders who fail in roles not aligned with traditional gender stereotypes face significantly harsher judgment.

The Study: Gender Stereotypes and Leadership Failures

The study presented participants with a fictional scenario involving a police chief overseeing a protest rally. When the protest escalated, resulting in 25 injuries due to insufficient officers, the consequences for the police chief varied by gender:

• Male Chief: Ratings dropped by 10%, with few calls for demotion.
• Female Chief: Ratings plummeted by nearly 30%, with widespread support for demotion.

Interestingly, when the protest was successfully pacified, gender differences in approval ratings disappeared. This trend persisted across other leadership roles, including CEOs and supreme court judges, where women in traditionally male-dominated roles faced harsher penalties for identical mistakes.

The “Glass Cliff” Effect

The phenomenon, termed the glass cliff, highlights how women who break through the glass ceiling to achieve leadership roles face greater scrutiny and are judged more harshly compared to their male counterparts.

Key Findings:

• Firing Rates: Women CEOs are more likely to be fired than men (38% vs. 27%), as shown in a 2013 Strategy& study.
• Media Bias: Research by the Rockefeller Foundation reveals that when companies led by women face crises, 80% of news stories blame the CEO, compared to only 31% for male CEOs.

Explaining the Glass Cliff

Several psychological principles shed light on why women leaders face harsher judgment:

1. Increased Scrutiny: Women in non-traditional roles stand out, triggering greater attention and criticism.
2. Stereotype Confirmation: People pay more attention to behaviour that aligns with stereotypes, reinforcing biases against women in leadership.
3. Fundamental Attribution Error: Failures of women leaders are attributed to their gender, while situational factors are discounted.
4. Paired Distinctiveness: Failures involving women leaders are doubly distinctive, heightening their visibility and perceived correlation between gender and failure.

Women Leaders Often Face Unfair Odds

1. Crisis Leadership Appointments

Women are more likely to be appointed to leadership roles in struggling companies. A 2010 study, The Road to the Glass Cliff, found:

• 62% of participants chose men to lead healthy companies.
• 69% of participants chose women to lead companies in crisis.

This trend stacks the odds against women, as crisis situations inherently carry a higher risk of failure.

2. External vs. Internal Appointments

Women CEOs are more likely to be external hires, which statistically have higher failure rates. According to Strategy&:

• 78% of male CEOs are internal hires.
• Only 65% of female CEOs are recruited internally.

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back

When women leaders are fired, they are often replaced by men, further reinforcing traditional stereotypes. A Strategic Management Journal study found that among Fortune 500 leadership transitions from 1996–2010, non-traditional leaders (women or minorities) were succeeded by other non-traditional leaders in just 4 of 608 cases.

Moving Forward: Addressing Gender Bias in Leadership

To challenge entrenched biases and promote gender equity in leadership, organizations must:

1. Develop Female Leadership Pipelines: Focus on nurturing talent from within the organization.
2. Appoint Women in Stable Times: Ensure women are given opportunities in healthy companies, not just in crises.
3. Increase Visibility of Successful Female Leaders: Normalize female leadership to disrupt stereotypes.
4. Commit to Inclusive Practices: Evaluate and address unconscious biases in leadership assessments.

Breaking Down Barriers

Gender bias in leadership is deeply rooted, as seen in comments like Akbar Al Baker’s assertion that leadership “has to be led by a man” or Gerry Harvey’s claim that women are unqualified for board roles. However, increasing the visibility of successful female leaders and addressing systemic biases can pave the way for equitable leadership opportunities.

By recognising and disrupting these biases, we can create an environment where leaders are judged by their actions, not their gender.

Read on LinkedIn