GENDER STEREOTYPING IN

ORGANIZATION AND ITS

NEGATIVE IMPACT ON WOMEN
Term Paper (word count: 1502)

Submitted to:
Barsha Rana
Faculty, Organizational Behavior
Ace Institute of Management

Submitted by:
Sagarika Sedhai
MBA, 2nd Trimester
Ace Institute of Management 2021/10/15
Due to ideas ingrained by our society about gender roles over thousands of years,
organizations often tend to stereotype their existing and prospective employees on the basis
of biological sex during recruitment and assignment of job responsibilities. When such
stereotypes are not relevant and deviate from facts, they can prompt biases. Employees are
one of the key assets of an organization. Therefore, it is crucial for organizations to address
such stereotypical biases in order to ensure that they do not underutilize or over-exhaust any
human resources. This paper focuses on the impact of gender stereotypes on women in an
organization with the aim to address biases resulting from stereotypical beliefs.

Gender stereotypes are generalizations about what men and women are like and what they
are supposed to do, just because they belong to a certain gender group. Such stereotypes are
found to be derived from the division of social roles and labor among men and women, both
in the domestic sphere and in the workplace. Women are stereotyped as more feminine, warm
or emotional than men due to their engagement in the majority of routine domestic work and
service-oriented occupations. In the other hand, men are stereotyped as more masculine or
competent due to their decision-making role in the household and their dominance in things-
oriented competitive occupations (Koenig and Eagly, 2014 as cited in Hentschel et al., 2019).
Such widely shared beliefs about men and women serve as shortcuts for forming impressions
about them, allowing perceivers to judge and respond quickly to the highly complex world
confronting them.

Though human beings have evolved beyond primal needs and though women are increasingly
pursuing traditionally male-dominated careers, traditional gender stereotypes are still
pervasive due to long-standing biases. Studies by Shcein et al. (1996), Heilman (2012), and
Hentschel et al. (2013) reveal that gender stereotypes are remarkably consistent across
different cultures and time periods, with men still characterized in dominant terms and
women in submissive terms. A study undertaken by Dennis & Kunkel (2011) indicates that
women are often considered unsuitable for leadership and decision-making positions as they
are stereotypically perceived as less capable physically, mentally, and emotionally than men,
contrary to what men are perceived as. The existence of such stereotypical beliefs in
organizations is detrimental to women’s career. Women not only face biasness during
recruitment or promotion, they are also demoralized when their problem-solving skills are
undervalued.
Ragins & Sundstorm (1989) say that a leader’s problem-solving reputation is a key source of
interpersonal power. This sort of power is used by the leaders to get the job done through
team-building and motivation. Because women are perceived as less effective at problem
solving, they often do not have an edge on interpersonal power. As a consequence, people
can be hesitant and less motivated to work under the leadership of women by casting doubts
on their problem-solving competence. Hence, such stereotypical beliefs can limit women’s
ability to build critical interpersonal power, leaving them to rely on power based on
hierarchal positions, which is even harder for women to get.

Discrimination still seems to follow even when women pave their way to higher positions.
Zimmer (1988) in her article reveals that women are treated as representations of their
category, as symbols rather than as individuals in the managerial rankings. Such practice is
termed as ‘tokenism’. A study undertaken by Gatrell and Cooper (2007) as cited in Tabassum
& Nayak (2021) found a positive association between stereotype-based expectations and
tokenism, revealing that women managers are more likely to experience tokenism as they
advance towards higher positions. The study also reveals that the first woman to progress in a
traditionally male-dominated position often experiences discrimination and stereotyping from
the majority group. Such behavior in an organization makes it difficult for women to actively
participate in decision-making roles and effectively use their positions.

A study undertaken by Favero & Ilgen (1989) reveals that evaluators are often reluctant to
make an effort to pay attention to the actual work behaviors of individuals about whom there
are stereotype-based expectations. Heilman (2001) in her article suggests that stereotype-
based performance expectations have a significant effect on information processing. Such
expectations prompt cognitive distortions, forming the bias in employees’ performance
evaluation. As a consequence, when women show deviant behavior from their traditional
stereotypes, such behavior often goes unnoticed. And even if evaluators do notice
stereotypically deviant characteristics in women, it can still affect women negatively because
inhibition of such characteristics, contrary to what women are expected to possess, makes
them unlikeable.

In her article, Heilman (2001) suggests that when women exhibit characteristics that are
incongruent with their gender stereotypes, such as breaking gender stereotypes and
succeeding in male-typed jobs, they are personally disliked and considered unfeminine.
Moreover, a study of Kunda et al. (1997) reveals that when women show gender inconsistent
behaviors, such behaviors are interpreted differently for different genders. For example, when
giving commands and asserting themselves, women may appear "bossy" or "cruel," whereas
men may appear "self-confident" or "strong-willed”. Likewise, Brescoll & Uhlmann (2008)
in their article demonstrates that expressions of anger by men in a professional context are
seen as appropriate conduct in a higher status role, whereas women who express anger in a
professional context are regarded as less competent.

Not only women, but men are also affected negatively because of stereotypical expectations
associated with their gender. A study of Chen (2008) as cited in Heilman (2012)
demonstrates that when men fail to act in accordance with their stereotypes, they are seen as
less of a man and they are even discriminated in rewards. For example, when men request for
leave because of their family issues, they suffer negativity in perceptions of their work ethics
more than women do because men are expected to be immune to emotions. As a
consequence, men are likely to be over-exhausted with many job responsibilities just because
they are expected to perform better than their female counterparts. Moreover, men are also
perceived negatively by society when they choose female-stereotypic occupations like
nursing, due to which they are demotivated to pursue such careers even if they want to.

While analyzing the biases that can be prompted by gender stereotypes, we should not
overlook the fact that a diversity strategy in workplace is a positive outcome of
acknowledging differences between men and women that are associated with biological and
environmental factors. According to a study undertaken by Zaidi (2010), men’s and women’s
brains function in different ways when they are confronted with problems, and their
approaches to solving the same problems are rather different, regardless of their similar
intelligence and aptitude. While men typically rely more heavily on the left side of their
brain, which is responsible for solving tasks logically, women were found to readily rely on
the right side of their brain, which is responsible for the creative thinking process. Since both
rational thinking and creative thinking are equally valued by contemporary management, the
collaboration of men and women while making decisions will in fact benefit organizations as
their diverse approaches complement one another to achieve organizational goals in the most
effective way possible. It appears that males and females are indeed two sides of a same coin.

Based on the research of Eagly & Carli (2003), communal attributes and behaviors, typically
associated with women are increasingly becoming valued characteristics for leadership roles,
which include sharing responsibility, developing others’ skills, building relationships and
reducing hierarchy. Moreover, research about transformational leadership has repeatedly
shown the benefits of taking a communal approach to leading (Bass & Avolio, 1994 as cited
in Heilman, 2012) and approaches such as individualized consideration and inspirational
motivation have more and more become associated with effective leadership (Eagly et al.,
2003). In addition to the gradual shift that may be occurring in how we think about
leadership, there is some evidence that there also is a shift in how we think about women.
There is evidence that people believe that over time women’s attributes have become more
like men’s and will continue to do so (Diekman & Eagly, 2000). In fact, research of
Hentschel et al. (2013), suggests that while women are still seen in traditionally stereotypic
terms-as more communal and less agentic than men, they are now seen as equal to men in
intelligence and competence. This revision of the female gender stereotype content bodes
well for women’s opportunities in the workforce. It also suggests that there is distinction to
be made between perceived agency and perceived competence, and that if leadership success
is thought to rely on competence and not just on agenticism, there will be improvement in
women’s perceived fit with the managerial and leadership role.

So while the current status of women in the workforce continues to be hampered by gender
stereotypes and their deleterious effects on evaluation and decision making, there is a reason
for optimism. It seems reasonable to be hopeful that this trend toward a more textured
characterization of women will continue given their ever increasing participation in the
workforce and their current and projected higher representation among the population.
References

Brescoll, V. L., & Uhlmann, E. L. (2008). Can an Angry Woman Get Ahead? Psychological
Science. Vol 19(3), pp 268–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02079.x

Dennis, M. R., & Kunkel, A. D. (2004). Perceptions of men, women, and CEOs: The effects
of gender identity. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal. Vol
32(2), pp 155–171. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2004.32.2.155

Diekman, A. B., & Eagly, A. H. (2000). Stereotypes as Dynamic Constructs: Women and
Men of the Past, Present, and Future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol
26(10), pp 1171–1188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200262001

Eagly, A. H., & Carli, L. L. (2003). The female leadership advantage: An evaluation of the
evidence. The Leadership Quarterly, Vol 14(6), pp 807–834.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.004

Eagly, A. H., Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C., & van Engen, M. L. (2003). Transformational,

transactional, and laissez-faire leadership styles: A meta-analysis comparing women
and men. Psychological Bulletin, 129(4), 569–591. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
2909.129.4.569

Favero, J. L., & Ilgen, D. R. (1989). The Effects of Ratee Prototypicality on Rater
Observation and Accuracy1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Vol 19(11), pp
932–946. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1989.tb01230.x

Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and Prescription: How Gender Stereotypes Prevent

Women’s Ascent Up the Organizational Ladder. Journal of Social Issues. Vol 57(4),
pp 657–674. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00234

Heilman, M. E. (2012). Gender stereotypes and workplace bias. Research in Organizational

Behavior. Vol 32, pp 113–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2012.11.003.

Hentschel, T., Heilman, M. E., & Peus, C. V. (2013). The Multiple Dimensions of Gender
Stereotypes: A Current Look at Men’s and Women’s Characterizations of Others and
 Themselves. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol 10, pp 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00011

Kunda, Z., Sinclair, L., & Griffin, D. (1997). Equal ratings but separate meanings:
Stereotypes and the construal of traits. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Vol 72(4), pp 720–734. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.4.720

Ragins, B. R., & Sundstrom, E. (1989). Gender and power in organizations: A longitudinal
perspective. Psychological Bulletin. Vol 105(1), pp 51–88.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.105.1.51

Schein, V.E., Mueller, R., Lituchy, T., & Liu, J. (1996). Think manager-think male: A global
phenomenon? Journal of Organisational Behaviour. Vol 17(1), pp 33-41

Tabassum, N., & Nayak, B. S. (2021). Gender Stereotypes and Their Impact on Women’s
Career Progressions from a Managerial Perspective. IIM Kozhikode Society &
Management Review. pp 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2277975220975513

Zaidi, Z. F. (2010). Gender Differences in Human Brain: A Review. The Open Anatomy
Journal. Vol 2, pp 37–55. https://doi.org/10.2174/1877609401002010037

Zimmer, L. (1988). Tokenism and Women in the Workplace: The Limits of Gender-Neutral
Theory. Social Problems. Vol 35(1), pp 64–77.
https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1988.35.1.03a00050